1
Massachusetts Advocates for Diversity in Education
Appendix: Full Description of Task Force Recommendations
January 17, 2014
Recruitment Recommendation #1 Full Description
(Diversity Recommendation #1)
Summary of
Recommendation #1
Design opportunities to attract highly talented students of color to the teaching
profession. Use the variety of teacher pipelines to create customized cohorts of
teachers (e.g. males of color, students interested in STEM, career changers, multilingual educators, etc.). In particular, develop a model for a local/communitybased pipeline, and encourage districts to create a variety of entry points into the
educator pipeline including (but not limited to) middle school, high school,
paraprofessionals, parents and/or community members vested in public
education. Innovative partnerships should be fostered among community
organizations, institutions of higher education, and school districts to maximize
the benefits of this initiative. This strategy enables districts to recruit culturally
and linguistically diverse candidates by accessing their entire school community.
Describe your
recommendation in
detail.
We recommend that DESE provides support for districts to develop
pipeline programs that would enable districts to “home grow” their own
teachers.
We recommend creating various entry points into the pipeline enabling the
districts to tap into multiple sources such as existing paraprofessionals and
substitutes as well as community members and of course their students.
2
Identify examples
(districts, communities,
organizations, or
individuals)
demonstrating this
recommendation.
Boston Public Schools will be launching a High School to Teacher Pipeline
Program in the fall of 2013. This program directly enables the district to
implement a pipeline development strategy articulated in the district’s
2012-2013 Teacher Diversity Action Plan (TDAP). The 2012-2013 TDAP
supports the BPS Acceleration Agenda and aligns with the BPS Achievement
Gap Policy.
This program will be Teacher Preparation Pipeline Program specifically for
Boston Public Schools students. This pipeline will support a cohort of 50
Boston high school students to successfully navigate high school, matriculate and
graduate from college and return to BPS as teachers. The model utilizes a
comprehensive research-based curriculum that engages students from 9th grade
through college graduation. Overall, this
Initiative will raise the academic achievement of the high school students of
Boston public schools; provide access to college for a higher number of BPS
students; and increase the number of well-prepared urban teachers of color
who are going to teach Boston school children; and improve the quality of
teaching and learning in the district’s schools.
The following other districts have high school to teacher programs:
Andover
Andover High School
Arlington
Arlington High School
Brookline
Brookline high School
Lexington
Lexington High School
Worcester
North High School
Define success for this
recommendation. Explain
why the example(s) is/are
deemed successful.
BPS has partnered with the Today’s Students Tomorrow’s Teachers (TSTT) to
launch this effort. TSTT is a non-profit organization that is in its 19th year of
programming and has had a record of success in cultivating teachers of color
utilizing a high school to teacher pipeline model. Their program data is below:
3
The TSTT high school retention rate is 90%
The TSTT college admissions rate is 96% The
TSTT college persistence is 83%.
The TSTT college graduation rate is 70%
96% of TSTT college graduates become teachers
Based on this data, our goal is to yield these results with our cohort of 50
students
How many educators or
students served (or could
potentially be served) in
this example?
50 BPS students
5 BPS teacher mentors
Does this recommendation
require funding? If so, how
has it been funded? What
are potential funding
sources?
To launch this pilot the district has secured funding for the inaugural cohort year
and will be securing funding for the remaining three-year cycle. We will also be
seeking external funding to support our current cohort and to launch additional
cohorts.
This recommendation
requires action by which
group of stakeholders
(Highlight key
stakeholder/s executing
this recommendation)
Describe their role.
_State
X Community/Organizations
_Associations
x_Districts
_
School level
x_Preparation Program
Description of role:
The district will be partnering with community based organizations and higher
education partners to support with recruitment, selection, family engagement
and the program curriculum.
Recommend effective
The district will work in partnership with our stakeholders to share this
opportunity with our students, families, school leaders, and teachers
communication plan
options. Describe how
stakeholders could be
informed about this
recommendation.
Cite any research that
Today’s Students Tomorrow’s Teachers Program linksupports this
http://www.tstt.org/
TSTT - Program Evaluation: 1994-2009
recommendation or the
http://www.tstt.org/images/Program%20Evaluation_2010.pdf
success of your examples.
Grow Your Own Program Literature review:
(Include links if available.)
http://growyourownteachers.org/index.php?option=com_content&vi
ew=article&id=130&Itemid=145#part3
4
Summary: See Page 1
Describe your
recommendation in
detail.
To plan and implement a pilot of “Grow Your Own Teacher Educator Initiative”
program in Massachusetts, patterned after the plan that is currently in place in
Illinois. For details of the initiative please see
http://www.growyourownteachers.org/AboutUs/
Identify examples
(districts,
communities,
organizations, or
individuals)
demonstrating this
recommendation.
Define success for this
recommendation.
Explain why the
example(s) is/are
deemed successful.
State of Illinois. There are 12 GYO partnerships in Illinois, 6 in Chicago and one each
in East St. Louis, Rockford, Quad Cities, South Suburbs, Southernmost Illinois, and
Springfield.
How many educators
or students served (or
could potentially be
served) in this
example?
Does this
recommendation
require funding? If so
how has it been
funded? What are
some potential
funding sources?
This recommendation
requires action by
which group of
stakeholders
(Highlight key
stakeholder/s
executing this
recommendation)
Describe their role.
In Illinois, there are approximately 275 GYO and Pre-GYO candidates attend
college, in addition to full-time employment and family responsibilities. According to
their website, they are excellent students with an average GPA of 3.3.
Recommend effective
communication plan
options. Describe how
stakeholders could be
informed about this
recommendation.
Cite any research that
supports this
The Grow Your Own Teachers initiative supports paraprofessionals, parents, and
community members in low-income communities to become highly effective
teachers through innovative partnerships of community organizations, higher
education institutions, and school districts. The goals:
1. a pipeline of highly effective teachers of color and
2. improved teacher retention in low-income schools resulting in improved
academic achievement of low-income students.
Yes, this recommendation requires funding. The potential funding sources are:
community foundations, college and university federal scholarship awards, low or no
interest student loans, partnership with districts and educator prep programs for a
student teacher/credit for GYOT participants.
_X State
_X Community/Organizations
_X Associations
X _Districts
X _School level
X _Preparation Program
Description of the role: The role of each stakeholder noted above is dependent on
the size of the cohort group enrolled in the program and to the extent that the
stakeholder can claim “ownership” of any part of the program. For example,
associations would be involved to the extent that a CBA would allow for work release
time to attend classes for a para-educator, along with an agreement to allow for
assignment of credit access in exchange for practicum supervision.
Effective communication of a GYOT plan to stakeholders would require the expertise
and bully pulpit of high ranking education officials throughout the Commonwealth.
GYO increases diversity, and improves the achievement of low-income students.
Research shows that students of color may do better academically when taught by
5
recommendation or
the success of your
examples. (Include
links if available.)
teachers of color (Goldhaber, 2008). GYO candidates are 85% people of color, an
important detail in Illinois, which ranks the third lowest in the country in percentage
of teachers vs. students of color.
http://www.learningpt.org/
6
Recruitment Recommendation #2 Full Description
(Diversity Recommendation #2)
Summary of
recommendation #2
Expand the acceptable out-of state educator experience requirements for Initial
licenses from three full years of employment under the license sought to include
educator license candidates who have successfully completed a National Association
of State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification (NASDTEC) or Council for
the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) accredited educator preparation
program and who hold a comparable educator license.
Describe your
recommendation in
detail.
The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education will support the
recruitment of a diverse pool of experienced educators from out-of-state, by
working directly with groups that support educators of diverse backgrounds and
providing support for experienced out-of state educators in applying
for educator licensure. The support will include the following:
Acceptance of the Praxis exam, passing scores to be determined by the
Commissioner, for an Initial license to allow districts to recruit and retain a diverse
pool of experienced educators from out-of-state.
Educators who have completed an NCATE/CAEP or NASDTEC accredited educator
preparation program will be waived from the three-year employment requirement
for the Temporary license to allow districts to recruit and retain a diverse pool of
highly qualified new educators.
The DESE will update and expand the aMAzing Educators section of the website to
provide additional information geared towards recruiting a diverse pool of out-ofstate educators. Updated information should include detailed instructions on the
documentation required for a temporary license, testing requirements (including any
reciprocal agreements), utilizing the Preliminary License as a route to teaching in
Massachusetts and the requirements and routes for obtaining the SEI Endorsement.
The following North East regional states accept the PRAXIS I & II for the purpose of
granting educator licensure: Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Vermont, Maine,
and New Hampshire. PARCC members of which Massachusetts is a member include
New York, New Jersey and Rhode Island. These states have adopted the Common
Core State Standards, and require educators to have the ability to implement
curriculum outlined in the new standards. DESE should consider offering license
reciprocity for educators licensed in PARCC states by the expected date of full
implementation of PARCC performance based and end-of year assessment in 2015.
Further consideration should be given to license reciprocity for educators licensed in
states with comparable NAEP scores to Massachusetts. Implementing these routes
to educator licensure would align with the routes to licensure of states with
comparable/common student NAEP achievement standards.
The definition of successful implementation of this recommendation will be based
on DESE license data for out- of-state educators being granted initial licenses based
on the recommendation. The long term success of implementing this
recommendation will be the number of in-state culturally diverse students who
become educators based on the affirmative academic experience that they have
while being instructed by diverse educators. Data from Learning Pointes Associates
clearly shows that educators serve as role models for professional success. Over
time, a growth in the in-state pipeline is a natural outcome.
All out-of-state licensed educators could potentially be served by the
Identify examples
(districts,
communities,
organizations, or
individuals)
demonstrating this
recommendation.
Define success for this
recommendation.
Explain why the
example(s) is/are
deemed successful.
How many educators
7
or students served (or
could potentially be
served) in this
example?
Does this
recommendation
require funding? If so
how has it been
funded? What are
potential funding
sources?
This recommendation
requires action by
which group of
stakeholders
(Highlight key
stakeholder/s
executing this
recommendation)
Describe their role.
Recommend effective
communication plan
options. Describe how
stakeholders could be
informed about this
recommendation.
Cite any research that
supports this
recommendation or
the success of your
examples. (Include
links if available.)
implementation of this recommendation. All students in the Commonwealth who
are currently underserved by inexperienced educators, with emphasis on those
students assigned to high poverty schools, will be served by increasing the number
of diverse experienced out-of-state educators.
Yes, this recommendation does require funding to be implemented. There would be
a one-time human capital costs in the Office of Educator Licensure as well as in the
Office of Technology to support re-alignment of ELAR. Once fully implemented, there
will be no cost.
_X State
X_Community/Organizations
X_Associations
X_Districts
X_School level
X_Preparation Program
Description of the role: Agreeing to and implementing additional routes to
certification requires action of key stakeholders. Their roles are based on the action
that each has to take to agree on alternative routes and to implement them based
on their respective roles.
The effective communication of this idea to stakeholders must come at the highest
levels of state education administrators and policy makers.
Learning Points Associates: Recruiting Minority Teachers provides excellent
strategies and replica models for successful recruitment and retention of minority
educators.
EPIMS data from 2012-2013 shows that high poverty schools, in the lowest
performance levels, hire a disproportionate level of inexperienced teachers. DESE
data also demonstrates that inexperienced teachers are more likely to be assigned to
teach students who are academically behind, contrasted to students who are
assigned to more experienced teachers. Student assigned to inexperienced teachers
have lower median student growth percentiles. Students of color and low SES status
students are two subgroups who continue to show little or no progress in narrowing
the academic achievement gap in the Commonwealth. Expediting license approval
through reciprocity is essential to meeting the growing needs of both subgroups.
Districts throughout the Commonwealth are placing employment advertisements in
local, regional and national print and online media outlets. Human Resource
professionals throughout the Commonwealth are recruiting through local, regional
and national venues. Despite the intensive and costly recruitment efforts on the part
of districts, the number of qualified candidates, particularly candidates of color, who
are licensed and ready to begin work in Massachusetts does not meet any
reasonable standard of successful measurement. The educator license regulations in
place at this time do not support meeting the goal of the Commonwealth to increase
the percentage of teachers of color to the minimum percentage set forth by the
Commissioner in his charge to the MADE Task Force.
http://www.doe.mass.edu/infoservices/
http://www.parcconline.org/parcc-states
8
http://www.learningpt.org/
http://nces.ed.gov/
http://www.topschooljobs.org/jobs/51094-65324/SPRINGFIELD-PUBLIC-SCHOOLSTurnaround-Secondary-School-Principals-Springfield-MA-USA
9
Recruitment Recommendation #3 Full Description
(Diversity Recommendation #3)
Summary of
Recruitment
Recommendation #3
Describe your
recommendation in
detail.
Identify examples
(districts,
communities,
organizations, or
individuals)
demonstrating this
recommendation.
Define success for this
recommendation.
Explain why the
example(s) is/are
deemed successful.
How many educators
or students served (or
could potentially be
served) in this
example?
Does this
recommendation
require funding? If so
how has it been
funded? What are
potential funding
sources?
Increase the transparency and accountability of the preparation program efforts to
diversify their enrollment and program completers by requiring approved programs
to report on the recruitment, retention, and program completion of its students. The
Department should consider producing a report of educator preparation programs.
ESE should collect and publicize additional data sets that would demonstrate the
recruiting and retention of diverse educator candidates. Enrollment data should be
linked to data around program completers. There should also be an opportunity for
annual discussion amongst preparation programs and the Department with a goal of
highlighting successful or promising practices.
Educator preparation programs should document outreach efforts to diversify their
candidate pools. ESE should collect and publicize additional data sets that outline
educator preparation programs’ efforts to diversify their candidate pools. In
addition, data on program completers of color should be published by ESE.
Additional data points should be identified for educator preparation programs to
report out on for ESE to include in a report. ESE should report MTEL pass rate data
disaggregated by gender, race/ethnicity and first language. ESE should create
opportunities for annual discussions among educator preparation programs so that
they can share successful recruitment and retention policies and practices. Ongoing
efforts could be shared virtually, perhaps through a portal set up by ESE, as well.
This section does not apply to this recommendation.
The definition of a successful implementation of the recommendation would be an
improvement in both recruiting candidate of color into educator preparation
programs statewide and in increased program completion rates for teachers of color
graduating from Massachusetts educator preparation programs.
Potentially several hundred potential candidates of color.
Limited funded would be required for analyses of reports submitted to ESE by the
educator preparation programs and for annual meetings or conferences. The
purpose of this annual meeting would be to review data and to provide
opportunities for networking and collaboration.
10
This recommendation
requires action by
which group of
stakeholders
(Highlight key
stakeholder/s
executing this
recommendation)
Describe their role.
Recommend effective
communication plan
options. Describe how
stakeholders could be
informed about this
recommendation.
Cite any research that
supports this
recommendation or
the success of your
examples. (Include
links if available.)
_X State
_Community/Organizations
_Associations
_Districts
_School level
X_Preparation Program
All educator preparation programs would be required to document recruitment and
retention efforts and report these to ESE on an annual basis.
Traditional communications between ESE and education preparation programs.
This section does not apply to this recommendation.
11
Recruitment Recommendation #4 Full Description
(Diversity Recommendation #4)
Summary of
recommendation #4
State will respond to MTEL Pass Rate Task Force Report. We request that ESE review
the technical recommendations of the 2008 MTEL Pass Rate Task Force report,
especially those recommendations that are designed to reduce the disparities in pass
rates on MTEL tests with respect to race/ethnicity and first language. We also
request that ESE follow up with the test vendor and require a comprehensive report
with respect to these recommendations.
Describe your
recommendation in
detail.
In February 2008, the MTEL Pass Rate Study Group (AKA MTEL Pass Rate Task Force)
forwarded its report on recommendations to reduce disparate pass rates on MTEL
tests to the Educational Personnel Advisory Council (EPAC). In April of 2008, these
recommendations were submitted to the Board of Education
(http://www.doe.mass.edu/boe/bib/08/0429.html).
Among the recommendations were very specific technical recommendations based
on the American Educational Research Association (AERA), American Psychological
Association (APA) and National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME) joint
“Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (1999).” There are seven
recommendations for the technical aspects of the MTEL Program in this report. The
test vendor provided several internal technical documents to the technical subgroup of this task force. The technical sub-groups’ recommendations were mainly
based on the lack of evidence in these internal documents of several conventional
procedures and statistical analyses, which are practices generally undertaken by test
developers in an effort to reduce potential test bias with respect to gender,
race/ethnicity and first language. There was evidence in the internal documents that
some practices designed to mitigate potential bias were present, such as an anti-bias
committee that examined test questions under development, but there wasn’t
evidence for analyses of differential item functioning, for example, which identifies
items that significantly disadvantage one or more subgroups of test-takers. (This was
just one of several procedures recommended by the technical subcommittee.) We
further recommend that the test vendor provide specific details on each
recommendation using current data in a report to Commissioners Mitchell Chester
and Richard Freeland. If specific recommendations are not accepted at this time, the
commissioners should know this so that they can take appropriate action. On the
other hand, the commissioners should be informed of recommendations that were
undertaken. Evidence of any recommendations undertaken should be provided in
this report as well. (Also see below.)
Below are Appendixes B and C (labeled in this document Attachments B and C) of the
February 2008 MTEL Pass Rate Task Force Report, which provides the list of the
technical recommendations and the AERA, APA & NCME standards they are based
on (Attachment B). In addition, the full text of the standards cited in the report is
12
listed in (Attachment C). The names and affiliations (at the time) of the members of
the MTEL Pass Rate Task Force are listed in Attachment A (table after Attachment C).
Identify examples
(districts,
communities,
organizations, or
individuals)
demonstrating this
recommendation.
Define success for this
recommendation.
Explain why the
example(s) is/are
deemed successful.
Success would be a comprehensive report by the test vendor to the commissioners
with respect to the MTEL Pass Rate Task Force Report (2008) technical
recommendations.
How many educators
or students served (or
could potentially be
served) in this
example?
Thousands of test-takers of color and those for whom English is a second (or third,
etc.) language.
Does this
recommendation
require funding? If so
how has it been
funded? What are
potential funding
sources?
No, it requires the test vendor to write a report.
13
This recommendation
requires action by
which group of
stakeholders
(Highlight key
stakeholder/s
executing this
recommendation)
X_State
_Districts
_Community/Organizations
_School level
_Associations
_Preparation Program
Description of the role: DESE would need to work with the test vendor to secure a
report on the technical recommendations.
Describe their role.
Recommend effective
communication plan
options. Describe how
stakeholders could be
informed about this
recommendation.
The test vendor should provide a comprehensive report with respect to each
technical recommendation to Commissioners Mitchell Chester and Richard Freeland.
We also recommend that any parts of this report, which do not divulge proprietary
information, should be released to all stakeholders.
Cite any research that
supports this
recommendation or
the success of your
examples. (Include
links if available.)
The “Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing” are widely accepted by
test developers and researchers throughout the United States and Canada. The
overarching goal of any large-scale assessment, especially a high-stakes assessment,
is that the test scores should represent, to the greatest degree possible, the testtakers’ skills and knowledge being measured (constructs). If the percentage of those
passing the tests across first language and race/ethnicity vary widely (i.e., disparate),
then the test should be examined for any potential sources of bias. Several MTEL
Pass Rate Task Force recommendations focus on reducing potential test bias. The
task force also noted that in 2005-2006, of the 13,434 first-time test takers who took
the Communication and Literacy MTEL test, there was a very low percentage of
Blacks (3.2%) and Hispanics (2.5%) who took the C&L in that test year (July 2005 to
June 2006). Similar percentages were recorded in other MTEL tests as well. (Note:
Ninety-five percent of all test takers provided race/ethnicity and first-language
information at registration.)
The information below is excerpted from a memo to the Educational Personnel Advisory Council from the MTEL
Pass Rate Study Group regarding “Recommendations for Addressing Disparities in MTEL Scores” (February 2008).
Attachment B
Technical Aspects of the MTEL Program - Recommendations
After careful analysis of a variety of technical documents and serious deliberations, both within the sub-group and
in the Study Group as a whole, the Technical Sub-Group makes the following recommendations regarding the
MTEL program:
14







The DOE should ensure adherence to the AERA, APA, and NCME Standards for Educational and
Psychological Testing by the testing company. AERA, APA, NCME Standards for Educational and
Psychological Testing (19991)
Complete and thorough technical information should be made available. (Standard 6.1& Standard 6.2
The process of setting cut-scores and any standard error adjustments made should be provided. Standard
2.14, Standards 4.9 & 4.19
Documentation of the validity evidence for the MTEL including standard setting, equating, analysis of
differential item functioning, analysis of mean test score differences across subgroups and validity
evidence based on test content (including job analysis) should be provided. Standards 6.3 & 6.5
Validity studies that determine whether the test scores are sufficiently valid for all subgroups of
examinees should be conducted. Standards 7.1 & 7.10
An analysis to assess the consistency of measurement across subgroups should be completed. Standard
7.1
The MTEL cut score process be continuously monitored, reviewed, and adjusted as necessary.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on
Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington,
D.C.: American Educational Research Association.
Attachment C
Full text of Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing2 (in order referenced)
Standard 6.1: Test documents (e.g., test manuals, technical manuals, user’s guides, and supplemental material)
should be made available to prospective test users and other qualified persons at the time a test is published or
released for use.
Standard 6.2: Test documents should be complete, accurate, and clearly written so that the intended reader can
readily understand the content.
Standard 2.14: Conditional standard errors of measurement should be reported at several score levels if constancy
cannot be assumed. Where cut score are specified for selection or classification, the standard errors of
measurement should be reported in the vicinity of each cut score.
Standard 4.9: When raw score or derived score scales are designed for criterion-referenced interpretation,
including the classification of examinees into separate categories, the rationale for recommended score
interpretations should be clearly explained.
Standard 4.19: When proposed score interpretations involve one or more cut scores, the rationale and procedures
used for establishing cut scores should be clearly documented.
Standard 14.8: Evidence of validity based on test content requires a thorough and explicit definition of the content
domain of interest. For selection, classification, and promotion, the characterization of the domain should be
based on job analysis.
15
Standard 6.3: The rationale for the test, recommended uses of the test, support for such uses, and information
that assists in score interpretation should be documented. Where particular misuses of a test can be reasonably
anticipated, cautions against such misuses should be specified.
Standard 6.5: When statistical descriptions and analyses that provide evidence of the reliability of scores and the
validity of their recommended interpretations are available, the information should be included in the test’s
documentation. When relevant for test interpretation, test documents ordinarily should include item level
information, cut scores and configural rules, information about raw scores and derived scores, normative data, the
standard errors of measurement, and a description of the procedures used to equate multiple forms.
Standard 7.1: When credible research reports that test scores differ in meaning across examinee subgroups for the
type of test in question, then to the extent feasible, the same forms of validity evidence collected for the examinee
population as a whole should also be collected for each relevant subgroup. Subgroups may be found to differ with
respect to appropriateness of test content, internal structure of test responses, the relation of test scores to other
variables, or the response processes employed by individual examinees. Any such funding should receive due
consideration it the interpretation and use of scores as well as in subsequent test revisions.
Standard 7.10: When large differences in test performance across subgroups of examinees are noticed, research
should be conducted to determine if these differences might be caused by shortcomings in the test
2
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on
Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington,
D.C.: American Educational Research Association.
MTEL Pass Rate Study Group – Attachment A
Name
Affiliation
1 Nick Balasalle
Human Resources Consultant,Boston Public Schools
2 William Dandridge
Retired V.P. for Urban Affairs and Associate Professor of Education, Lesley
University
3 Linda Davis-Delano
Director of Educator Preparation & Licensure, Springfield College
4 Sally L. Dias
V.P. for Programs and Partnerships in Education and Director of the Carolyn A.
Lynch Institute, Emmanuel College
5 John Ekstrom
Mathematics Department Chairman, Scituate Public Schools
6 Candace Hall
Director of Human Resources, Andover Public Schools
Desiree Humphries7 Ivey
Director of Teacher Training & Recruitment, Shady Hill School
8 Eileen Lee
Director of Improving Teacher Quality Grants, Massachusetts Board of Higher
Education
James Martin9 Rehrmann
Dean of Education, Academic Affairs, Westfield State College
16
10 Lisa Mikus
Grade 4 Teacher, Horace Mann School, Newton, MA
11 Peter C. Murrell Jr.
Associate Professor, Northeastern University School of Education
12 Joseph J. Pedulla
Associate Professor, The Lynch School of Education and Senior Research Associate,
The Center for the Study of Testing, Evaluation, and Educational Policy, Boston
College
13 Margaret V. Reed
Consulting Program Director, The SPOKE Special Education Collaborative
14 Ellen M. Rintell
Professor, Salem State College
15 Ray Shurtleff
Chair, Educational Personnel Advisory Council
16 Steve Sireci
Professor, School of Education and Director, Center for Educational Assessment,
UMass Amherst
17 Patricia A. Smith
Assistant Professor of English, English Education, Fitchburg State College
Technical Sub- Group
Breadth of Issues Sub-Group
Sally Dias
Nick Balasalle
Joseph Pedulla
Desiree Humphries-Ivey
Margaret Reed
Eileen Lee
James Martin-Rehrmann
Peter Murrell
Steve Sireci
Ray Shurtleff
Writing Sub-Group
Nick Balasalle
Linda Davis-Delano
Candace Hall
Lisa Mikus
Ellen Rintell
Patricia Smith
17
Recruitment Recommendation #5 Full Description
(Diversity Recommendation #5)
Summary of
recommendation #5
Describe your
recommendation in
detail.
Identify examples
(districts,
communities,
organizations, or
individuals)
demonstrating this
recommendation.
Define success for this
recommendation.
Explain why the
example(s) is/are
deemed successful.
How many educators
or students served (or
Develop a systemic search process protocol.
School leaders and school committees must be knowledgeable about cross cultural
practices, and understand the importance of recruiting and retaining educators of
color. These leaders must create and sustain the conditions necessary to retain
educators of color in their school systems. Prospective superintendents and school
administrators must also have a tool to gauge a school system’s professional culture
and a understanding of cultural proficiency on a continuum of learning.
1.) To that end, the State, in collaboration with MASS and MASC and other
organizations, will develop a training program to improve cultural proficiency to
create and sustain an inclusive environment for candidates and potential employees
whose cultural backgrounds offer differing perspectives of the school community
involved.
2.) Cultural competency assessments should be conducted across the school system
to determine the conditions and culture of the district and community. This will
provide school leadership with the opportunity to prioritize areas for training and
will give ESE the opportunity to encourage the change of community mindsets.
School districts in conjunction with local community organizations and the school
committee should establish search committees that have been trained on legal
considerations, practices, behavioral interviewing questions to promote
standardization of process, probing techniques, and candidate selection. A model
guideline should be established with the goal of increasing the number of educators
of color in the workforce.
Recruiting & Retaining Educators of Color: In order to increase and sustain hires, a
review of the current recruitment process should be completed. A search process
should be implemented that includes:
Firstly, a review of applications by a search committee that has been trained on legal
considerations, practices, behavioral interviewing, probing techniques, and
candidate selection.
Secondly, as part of the process an orientation program should be developed to
orient employees and assess progress over a six month period (or designated
probationary period established by bargaining unit).
The University of Massachusetts Lowell currently has a similar program in place.
Anyone involved in interviewing candidates is required to complete a search
committee training session which educates them. Success would be demonstrated
by an increased percentage of candidates of color in the candidate pool. Increased
hiring and retention of educators of color as well as an increase in current employee
engagement with the process and awareness. There are check points in the process
which assist the search committee in ensuring there is a diverse pool of candidates.
At each check point, there are discussions concerning the diversity of the pool and
why the candidates are not being considered.
Everyone.
18
could potentially be
served) in this
example?
Does this
recommendation
require funding? If so
how has it been
funded? What are
potential funding
sources?
This recommendation
requires action by
which group of
stakeholders
(Highlight key
stakeholder/s
executing this
recommendation)
Describe their role.
Recommend effective
communication plan
options. Describe how
stakeholders could be
informed about this
recommendation.
Cite any research that
supports this
recommendation or
the success of your
examples. (Include
links if available.)
This recommendation would require minimal funding in terms of man-hours,
technology, food and beverage, Xeroxing, etc. The training session would be no
more than two hours and can reasonably accommodate up to 25 attendees.
X State
X Community/Organizations
X Associations
X Districts
X School level
_Preparation Program
Description of the role: Each of these constituents plays a role in the success of the
program. Their initial role would be in the development stage and follow up role in
being part of the orientation program.
Develop a full proposal of the program. Have an Executive Summary of the expected
outcome, and “market” the program via newsletter, email, on site presentations.
Personal experience in implementing a program as well as reporting data form
search processes. www.uml.edu
19
Summary
(Recommendation #5 continued)
Describe your
recommendation in
detail.
Provide some training on how to assess the current conditions of the culture of the
district to be certain that the core values of the candidate align with the values of
the district.



Conduct a cultural assessment of the district. This will determine the issues
and challenges that need to be addressed, as well as gaps.
Develop workshops to acclimate current employees in promoting an
inclusive culture.
Develop standardized orientation program to adapt new hires to the
inclusive environment.
Identify examples
(districts,
communities,
organizations, or
individuals)
demonstrating this
recommendation.
We have emphasized the assessment of current conditions in the New
Superintendents Induction Program and this work has been helpful to the recently
hired superintendent in a district. The Urban Superintendents have put this topic on
their agenda for the 2013-2014 school year.
Define success for this
recommendation.
Explain why the
example(s) is/are
deemed successful.
This work is as important as many superintendents from different ethnic/racial
backgrounds have not been successful.
How many educators
or students served (or
could potentially be
served) in this
example?
The students who are enrolled in districts led by men and women representing
different ethnic and racial groups.
Does this
recommendation
require funding? If so
how has it been
funded? What are
potential funding
sources?
The recommendation would only require funding if there is no one at DESE who
would feel qualified to provide this training.
This recommendation
requires action by
which group of
stakeholders
X_State
_Districts
_Community/Organizations
_School level
_Associations
_Preparation Program
20
(Highlight key
stakeholder/s
executing this
recommendation)
Description of role: Provide the training.
Describe their role.
Recommend effective
communication plan
options. Describe how
stakeholders could be
informed about this
recommendation.
M.A.S.S could send out a notice via the listserv to see if there is any interest beyond
the Urban Superintendents’ group.
Cite any research that
supports this
recommendation or
the success of your
examples. (Include
links if available.)
21
Summary
(Recommendation #5 continued)
Describe your
recommendation in
detail.
I recommend one specific recommendation with the hiring and retention of
educators of color in mind. The focus on the design and quality of the interview
process is a must. I suspect based on my knowledge of hiring and interview
processes in Cambridge and Lynn that this is an area of the wide difference.
I believe it to be important that there at least be some definite model guidelines put
in place with the goal of increasing the hire of educators of color. In Cambridge,
there was a clear standard set for who should be on interview committees and the
representation of underrepresented groups, etc. During my time in Cambridge, this
process seemed to reflect well in the hiring of a diverse pool of educators. In my
home community of Lynn, this is not the case.
Identify examples
(districts,
communities,
organizations, or
individuals)
demonstrating this
recommendation.
Probably several to many school districts across the Commonwealth
Define success for this
recommendation.
Explain why the
example(s) is/are
deemed successful.
Balanced and equitably selected interview/hiring committees. The outcome is a fair
process where qualified candidates of color have an equal opportunity to present
and be hired
How many educators
or students served (or
could potentially be
served) in this
example?
Entire school districts.
Does this
recommendation
require funding? If so
how has it been
funded? What are
potential funding
sources?
This recommendation could be handled fiscally at the local district level.
This recommendation
requires action by
x_State
x_Districts
22
which group of
stakeholders
(Highlight key
stakeholder/s
executing this
recommendation)
x_Community/Organizations
x_School level
_xAssociations
x_Preparation Program
Description of the role:
Describe their role.
Recommend effective
communication plan
options. Describe how
stakeholders could be
informed about this
recommendation.
DESE should employ all of the traditional means of communicating and electronic
tools, email, webinars, Ted Talks, Twitter, and other forms of social media.
Cite any research that
supports this
recommendation or
the success of your
examples. (Include
links if available.)
The research on the link between cultural responsive pedagogy and academic, social
and emotional success for schools educating can be found in the research of
scholars such as Gloria Ladson Billings, Geneva Gay, Asa Hilliard, Wade Boykin, Pedro
Noguera, et al.
23
Cultural Proficiency Recommendation #1 Full Description
(Diversity Recommendation #6)
Summary of
recommendation #6
Describe your
recommendation in
detail.
Create a system for monitoring student exclusion data at the state level. ESE internal
staff will monitor the full data set of student suspension and retention regardless of
the size of the cohort and for all student groups. Suspension data from all schools
will be monitored, and districts with high suspension rates will receive supports to
decrease non-violent suspension rates. ESE will respond with commendations,
recommendations, suggestions, and identification of supports.
ESE internal staff will monitor student suspension and retention rates within each
school district for all student demographic groups (e.g. race, gender, socioeconomic
status, home language, etc.) Although it is accepted research practice to withhold
the findings of populations that are numerically or statistically insignificant (e.g. only
one African American student), in this case, it is important to carefully monitor the
results of each individual student so that an accurate portrayal of exclusion is
provided and can be remedied by identified supports. The study of school
suspension data will also determine the levels of violent vs. non-violent infractions
and the corresponding fairness of punishment and will assess the time spent out of
school and individual classrooms for both violent and non-violent infractions.
Districts with high suspension rates will receive support from ESE; concurrently,
there will be efforts to assess the resolution of non-violent infractions to ensure that
education remains as consistent as possible for troubled youth. After a full study of
school data, ESE will respond with commendations to school districts which have
employed best practices to keep students in school, and will provide
recommendations, suggestions, and systems of support for school districts with high
suspension rates to improve the retention ratesand the academic achievement of all
students.
Cross-cultural proficiency remains an important area of focus both in this
recommendation and throughout the full report. If all groups are included vs. just
Black and Hispanic, the recommendations will be more valuable and more likely to
be accepted by all school districts. For example, there are large issues concerning
poor white boys and those demographics are also important. A complementary area
of focus for the ESE involves the other end of the educational spectrum. Future
research and study is needed to examine AP/Honors inclusion and passage rates for
all students, and it is important for the data to be similarly inclusive of all groups,
including poor white students, for example.
24
Identify examples
(districts,
communities,
organizations, or
individuals)
demonstrating this
recommendation.
Following are examples of similar efforts in other states:


Define success for this
recommendation.
Explain why the
example(s) is/are
deemed successful.
How many educators
or students served (or
could potentially be
served) in this
example?
Does this
recommendation
require funding? If so
how has it been
funded? What are
potential funding
sources?
This recommendation
Dignity in Schools Campaign – New York (DSC-NY). Mission: “The Dignity in
Schools Campaign (DSC) challenges the systemic problem of pushout in our
nation's schools and advocates for the human right of every child to a quality
education and to be treated with dignity. The DSC unites parents, youth,
educators and advocates in a campaign to promote local and national
alternatives to a culture of zero-tolerance, punishment and removal.”
www.dignityinschools.org – “This website includes a searchable database of
research on pushout, school discipline, and positive alternatives, specific
resources for youth, parents and educators, and information about our
active campaign projects.”As a result of the Student Safety Act that Mayor
Bloomberg signed into law on January 6, 2011, the DOE and NYPD are
required to report quarterly to the City Council on various measures of
student safety. Although the new data was provided to the City Council, the
Act is under scrutiny as it fails to provide a complete picture on the use of
suspensions in city schools.In May, 2011, Los Angeles banned suspensions
for ‘willful defiance’ in response to calls from students and parents to
address racial disparities in school discipline. The Los Angeles school district
has mandated School-Wide Positive Behavior Supports in every school since
2007 and recently voted to implement Restorative Practices as well.
Success for this recommendation shall be defined as a marked decrease in the
number of suspensions for students of color in every school system in the state and
an overall decrease in the suspension of students of color in the Commonwealth. A
decrease in overall suspensions is an important indicator of success as it is indicative
of a society that is becoming increasingly culturally proficient and aware of the
profound and negative impact that disproportionate suspensions have for children
of color, including but not limited to a disruption in learning, an adverse impact on
self-image, and a widening of achievement and opportunity gaps.
It is possible that this recommendation may affect all educators in the
Commonwealth and a high proportion of students if the ESE carefully monitors and
provides the needed supports to districts.
Time and money will be required to implement this recommendation, although a
reexamination of ESE’s priorities may help to reduce implementation costs. For
example, it may be possible to use existing ESE resources/staff to do this work by
reprioritizing the work of a particular office or department. Training and support for
districts may require additional funding.
X_State
_Districts
25
requires action by
which group of
stakeholders
(Highlight key
stakeholder/s
executing this
recommendation)
Describe their role.
Recommend effective
communication plan
options. Describe how
stakeholders could be
informed about this
recommendation.
Cite any research that
supports this
recommendation or
the success of your
examples. (Include
links if available.)
_Community/Organizations
_School level
_Associations
_Preparation Program
Description of the role: The ESE is the lead agent in this recommendation, and they
will be designing a system of monitoring and compliance to reduce the
disproportionate suspensions for students of color.
The ESE should develop a communication plan to clearly articulate to all school
systems, administrators, and community leaders including advocacy groups and
school committees that there is a growing concern with the disproportionate
suspension rates of students of color in the Commonwealth, the research that
supports why this is a problem, and the benefits that will come to our students when
we agree to collectively address the problem. The communication plan could
include presentations by the ESE to various groups such as the the Metropolitan
Council for Educational Opportunity, the Massachusetts Association of School
Superintendents, and the Massachusetts Association of School Committees.
In November, 2012, the Regional Educational Laboratory at Education Northwest
published a literature review entitled, “What We Know about Reducing
Disproportionate Suspension Rates for Students of Color” in which they indicate that
“Disproportionate rates of suspensions for students of color, especially African
American students is a local, state, and national concern (Gregory and Weinstein
2008; Kaufman et al. 2010; Skiba et al. 2002; Wallace et al. 2008). The full report is
enclosed.
26
Cultural Proficiency Recommendation #2
(Diversity Recommendation #7)
Summary of
recommendation #7
Describe your
recommendation in
detail.
Identify examples
(districts,
communities,
organizations, or
individuals)
demonstrating this
recommendation.
Define success for this
recommendation.
Explain why the
example(s) is/are
deemed successful.
Create and implement strategies to support transition points for students. The new
reality of public schooling is changing rapidly. In a few short years, students of color
will be the majority population in U.S. public schools. In order to remain competitive
nationally and internationally, it is imperative that Massachusetts lead the way in
supporting the academic, social, emotional and cultural growth of all students.
Imperative to their development, students need to be educated to understand the
fullness of “who they are”, particularly students of color. Supports need to be in
place that promote a sense of self efficacy and provide these students with another
“common core,” – a common core that enables them to understand the critical
importance of knowing in a deep and intimate way “who they are” and why
knowledge of their culture and identity are inextricably bound to their hopes,
dreams, aspirations and success.
This recommendation includes the need for a parallel program for adults. Adults
working to understand and honor the voices of students must immerse themselves
in the study of culture, theirs as well as the students of the students they serve. I
suggest that as a start, every teacher of 6th grade students read the classic book by
Gloria Ladson Billings, a prominent expert and early advocate for cultural responsive
teaching. The Dreamkeepers, explores what 8 teachers black and white do to
increase their exposure to and delivery of CRT. This book which can lead to book
study conversations and application and implementation is foundational to the work
required to develop students who are academically proficient, and socially and
emotionally strong. At the same time, it helps teachers to grow their identity as they
help their students to grow their own. The Common Ground theme holds as an
appropriate one. With the addition of a component that provides teachers with
scaffolding, ideas and strategies, it becomes a more authentic one in its scope and
power.
1. Needham Public Schools/ Needham METCO Department
The METCO Department for Needham Public Schools has developed a program
entitled Common Ground. The program works with 6th grade students of color. The
purpose of the program is to provide academic support to students, but more
importantly, the program focuses on the social and emotional concerns of this age
group. We know that the 6th grade can be a critical point for students. They begin to
question who they are, and sometimes make choices that can have a negative
impact on their future.
Common Ground provides students an opportunity to address issues of concern to
them and helps students develop a tool kit of positive choices. It also provides
resources for students and parent regarding difficult conversations.
The group meets on a 5-day cycle and is taught by the middles school METCO
Coordinator. Students do group reading, keep journals and have open discussions
how they can support each other as a community of learns.
2. High School Advisory Programs
3. Open Circle for grade K-5
The Needham METCO Common Ground program has run for 2 years. Students and
parents have found it to be a useful resource. It has also helped the MECTO
department and the district to more effectively meet the needs of the students. By
working closely with the students and hearing their voices we can adjust our
academic and social emotional programing to better meet their needs. It is our hope
27
How many educators
or students served (or
could potentially be
served) in this
example?
Does this
recommendation
require funding? If so
how has it been
funded? What are
potential funding
sources?
This recommendation
requires action by
which group of
stakeholders
(Highlight key
stakeholder/s
executing this
recommendation)
Describe their role.
Recommend effective
communication plan
options. Describe how
stakeholders could be
informed about this
recommendation.
Cite any research that
supports this
recommendation or
the success of your
examples. (Include
links if available.)
that this, and other programs will have a long term affect on the way our students
view themselves as learners and valued members of the community.
On average, the Needham Metco Program serves between 20-30 students a year.
The Needham Metco Program requires no additional funding.
_Districts
_Community/Organizations
Description of the role:
The district and the METCO office work in collaboration. A team of administrators
and educators developed the program and the curriculum.
The program is taught by the METCO coordinator for the middle school. She works
in collaboration with the principal as well other teachers in the building. The METCO
Elementary School Coordinator, the High School METCO Coordinator and I also
provide resources and other programmatic supports.
We work directly with families inviting them to information sessions about the
program.
28
Cultural Proficiency Recommendation #3 Full Description
(Diversity Recommendation #8)
Summary of
recommendation #8
Describe your
recommendation in
detail.
Create and establish a Cultural Responsive Education (CRE) Academy for Educators at
all levels with a requirement that educator preparation programs demonstrate
effective cultural proficiency training for all approved Initial licensure programs for
teachers and administrators. The CRE Academy will focus on building an in-depth
understanding around the critical importance of CRE within all school-based settings
and how they impact policies, procedures, and practices. There needs to be a
culturally responsive mindset and commitment developed amongst our leadership,
as well as specific courses should be offered to policy-makers. Awareness of what it
means to be culturally proficient needs to be raised among all educator
stakeholders, followed by professional development. Professional development
should be made available for all school-based and district staff, as well as school
committee members. A commitment to provide CRE training will help to develop a
culturally responsive mindset among all education stakeholders. Candidates in
approved programs for Initial licensure should complete training and field
experiences that increase their understanding of cultural proficiency, family and
community engagement and diversity in education. An optional endorsement to
educators’ licenses should be made available to those who already hold an Initial or
Professional license and complete additional professional development in culturally
responsive education and family and community engagement.
In alignment with the MA fundamentals of family and community engagement and
MA educator evaluation standards, teacher and principal licensure programs should
require all state preparation programs to provide professional development focused
on building the capacity of diverse cadre of educators and administrators both in
cultural proficiency and systemic family and community engagement for student
learning and school improvement. Professional development should focus on
building the capacity and providing support to educators and administrators in the
development of the cultural competence that is required to understand and value
the diversity of students. It is also important to strengthen the relationships
required for effective cultural connections and family and community engagement
while bringing differences as a strength to the improvement of student outcomes.
There should be a state licensure requirement for all teacher and administrator
preparation programs that requires coursework and a practicum with portfolios to
demonstrate mastery in using effective cultural proficiency responsiveness and
family & community engagement strategy in school improvement and individual
professional development plans. The inclusion of this recommendation as a
requirement in the education preparation programs is to promote active
engagement of school leaders as partners with diverse families and community to
create a school/home culture of mutual support and commitment to all students'
learning and schools' improvements.
The preparation programs with proper emphasis on capacity-building preparation
and support of teacher and administrators should consider linking the elements of
culturally proficiency and family engagement required to understand and value the
diversity and experiences of students and families in rigorously examining and
monitoring cultural norms, policies, programs, instructional practices,
29
communication and collaboration. For example, educators and administrators
should learn and apply how to improve their professional role to contribute directly
to culturally proficient and family engagement goals, developing the knowledge and
skills needed to leverage family engagement to deepen partnerships and
collaboration with student learning, and being accountable as partners for ensuring
responsibility on culturally responsive and systemic family engagement addressing
norms, core beliefs, policies, and practices to ensure that these goals are
implemented.
Preparation and licensure programs should align curriculum scope and sequence
with capacity building of teachers and administrators using the MA Fundamentals of
family and community engagement elements on the continuum of levels of
development and implementation in self-assessment and action-planning. Specific
Indicators could reflect the cultural proficiency and partnership responsibilities,
opportunities, and expectations of families, schools, school districts, and
communities in partnering together to support student performance and academic
achievement (Lewis and Henderson, 1998).
Identify examples
(districts,
communities,
organizations, or
individuals)
demonstrating this
recommendation.
Define success for this
recommendation.
Explain why the
example(s) is/are
deemed successful.
Boston Public School District is strongly committed to the work of building the
capacity of teachers and principals in cultural proficiency and family engagement
practices in alignment with MA Educator Evaluation and MA Fundamentals of Family
and Community Engagement to eliminate persistent disparities in achievement and
school improvement. The BPS's Office of Family and Student Engagement in
collaboration with other district departments ensures that cultural proficiency and
family engagement strategies are embedded into all practices, tools, resources, and
information. Some examples demonstrating this recommendation are as follows:
BPS Standards for Family and Student Engagement, 5 Core Elements of Family and
Student Engagement aligned to Title I Family Engagement, Teacher and Principals
Trainings and PD, BPS Teacher Guides of engaging families in student learning, and
High Impact strategies for linking family engagement to student learning, and the
Cultural Proficiency Policy.
Success has occurred in various school districts and university/community
organizations and partnerships. If this recommendation is successful, we will see the
following outcomes:
> Aligning preparation and licensure programs of cultural proficiency and family
engagement with MA fundamentals for family and community engagement and MA
Educator Evaluation to ensure that all district, schools, nonprofits,
college/universities, educator preparation organizations/businesses, and state
department policies, procedures, plans and protocols reflect this priority
requirement in all aspects of their operations, preparation, and communication.
> Training and hiring a cadre of competent teachers and administrators who are
culturally proficient and competent in promoting practices that encourage family
engagement. These educators are able to articulate and demonstrate collaborative
district and school level efforts to develop and implement effective culturally
proficient and systemic family engagement practices aligned to quality school
improvement and district priorities with diverse stakeholders at all school and
community levels.
> Providing coherent preparation and licensure programs with rigorous professional
development, coursework and practicum addressing culturally responsive and family
engagement practices focusing on a capacity building framework to ensure that
cultural sensitivity and cultural competence are embedded in all aspects of teaching
and learning, data inquiry, school culture, school improvement and operations,
curriculum and instruction, professional learning community and student outcomes.
30
How many educators
or students served (or
could potentially be
served) in this
example?
Does this
recommendation
require funding? If so
how has it been
funded? What are
potential funding
sources?
This recommendation
requires action by
which group of
stakeholders
(Highlight key
stakeholder/s
executing this
recommendation)
Describe their role.
Teachers and principals should be responsive to the strengths and areas of supports
of all students and their families, and build the capacity of other school staff and
families with a focus on principles of culturally relevant knowledge and skills to
support improvement of student outcomes and school climate.
> Deepen partnerships to leverage culturally meaningful family and community
engagement with student learning to ensure educators and administrators are
treated as equal partners in the educational process. Successful and meaningful
relationships will also be an area of focus. These relationships will promote the
expansion of partnerships with diverse school-home-community stakeholders to
build trust and commitment to improvement in student outcomes. Educators and
administrators will understand that partnerships are based on strengths rather than
a deficit model. They will assess and respond to the unique needs of the families
served and focus on removing any impediments to the positive relationships
necessary for educators and community members to achieve success and
accommodate the wide range of students served.
Approximately over 500+ educators and administrators
Adequate funding for local LEA, school district and collaborative preparation
program partner(s) will be needed to secure appropriate resources and sustained
funding. This funding will be used to provide the professional development and
other cultural proficiency and family engagement supports needed to eliminate the
achievement and access gap.
Potential Funding Source of Title I Funding and/or State Professional Development
and Capacity Building Funding Allocations.
X State
X Districts
X Community/Organizations
X School level
X Associations
X Preparation Program
Description of the role:
The DESE will lead in the development of state regulations for educator and
administrator licensure and preparation programs policy with requirements and
evaluative supports. This will ensure that continuous and relevant program design
and delivery include current research on cultural proficiency and family engagement
as priorities that align with MA Fundamentals of Family and Community Engagement
and Educator Evaluation.
Preparation Programs will adhere to state regulations and provide evidence of the
successful implementation of state cultural proficiency and family engagement
requirements. These Preparation Programs will revisit and update syllabi,
coursework, required reading, and practicum and compile a mastery evidence
portfolio to demonstrate cultural proficiency and family engagement strands,
research, and practices.
District and Schools will adhere to state regulations and create cultural proficiency
and family engagement district/school policy and procedures that align with
professional development and desired institutional practices. They will provide
evidence of the implementation and capacity building of all educators and
administrators in their district/school.
31
Recommend effective
communication plan
options. Describe how
stakeholders could be
informed about this
recommendation.
Cite any research that
supports this
recommendation or
the success of your
examples. (Include
links if available.)
Community Organizations and Associations will adhere to state regulations and
demonstrate collaboration with key organizations and families focused on cultural
proficiency and family engagement perspectives and practices.
State Bulletin, State Informational Meetings, State Requirement Kickoff with host
expert and successful family and community engagement and cultural proficiency
leaders in the field, posting updates on state website in preparation and licensure
sections, district and organizations' communications office and website, and local
and state newspaper publications.
Family Engagement experts: Michele Brooks, Karen Mapp, Don Davies, Anne Lewis,
Ann Henderson, Heather Weiss and Byrk et. al.
Cultural Proficiency experts: Nancy Adler, Alan Richter and Sondra Theiederman
Fundamentals: http://www.doe.mass.edu/boe/sac/parent/FSCPfundamentals.pdf
32
Summary
Describe your
recommendation in
detail.
Identify examples
(districts,
communities,
organizations, or
individuals)
demonstrating this
recommendation.
Define success for this
recommendation.
Explain why the
example(s) is/are
deemed successful.
How many educators
or students served (or
could potentially be
served) in this
example?
Does this
recommendation
require funding? If so
how has it been
funded? What are
potential funding
sources?
This recommendation
(Recommendation #8 continued)
I recommend one specific recommendation with at least two tracks in mind. Cultural
Responsive Education must become an ingrained mindset across the school and
district. To begin the process of building a CRE mindset, I recommend the
establishment of a Cultural Responsive Education Academy for Teachers and
Administrators. The CRE Academy would have a focus on building an in depth
understanding around the critical importance of CRE within all settings that impact
policies, procedures and practices.
Further, I recommend that specific courses be developed and offered to policy
makers (school committee, et al.). Across the Commonwealth, the diversity of the
student population continues to grow at a rapid pace. Unfortunately, this is not
matched in the educator ranks. Moreover, the degree of understanding of CRE is
shallow at best. Following a defined period of exposure to the course of study
offered by the CRE Academy, I recommend that a CRE Committee be established in
each school with an umbrella structure at the district level. The purpose of the CRE
committees at the school and district level is to monitor and support the
development of building a district-wide CRE mindset with the intent to fully
implement to impact policy, procedures and educational practice.
To date and my knowledge, Boston Public Schools and Needham Public Schools have
made earnest attempts to build CRE mindsets across school, districts and in the case
of Needham, the community as well.
Needham took a positive and proactive approach to launching a district and
community wide campaign called “300 Actions.” The aim was to launch their cultural
responsive initiative on MLK day at a community wide forum. The intent was to
respond to the growing diversity in Needham by forming 30 action teams comprising
educators, parents, students and community members. Each committee was
charged with creating an action that was replicable but designed to grow awareness,
understanding and application of culturally responsive principles in home,
community, school and district settings. The commitment was for a year of study and
interaction that allowed the 10 members of each group to engage one other person.
The goal by the next MLK Day was to present 300 tangible and impactful actions that
would deepen the town’s resolve to fully commit to becoming a culturally responsive
community.
The scale and number of educators and policy makers would be very large. The DESE
of course has done major rollouts with the goal of immersing educators in a long
term, sustainable way before. The National Institute for School Leaders (NISL), is a
leadership program designed for school principals was a long term program to
develop the leadership capacity of this group.
This recommendation would require funding to support design development,
facilitators, faculty, curriculum development, etc.
x_State
x_Districts
33
requires action by
which group of
stakeholders
(Highlight key
stakeholder/s
executing this
recommendation)
Describe their role.
Recommend effective
communication plan
options. Describe how
stakeholders could be
informed about this
recommendation.
x_Community/Organizations
_xAssociations
Description of the role:
x_School level
x_Preparation Program
Cite any research that
supports this
recommendation or
the success of your
examples. (Include
links if available.)
The research on the link between culturally responsive pedagogy and academic,
social and emotional success for schools can be found in the research of scholars
such as Gloria Ladson Billings, Geneva Gay, Asa Hilliard, Wade Boykin, Pedro
Noguera, et al.
DESE should employ all of the traditional means of communicating and electronic
tools, email, webinars, Ted Talks, Twitter, and other forms of social media.
34
Summary
Describe your
recommendation in
detail.
Identify examples
(districts,
communities,
organizations, or
individuals)
demonstrating this
recommendation.
Explain why the
example(s) is/are
deemed successful.
How many educators
or students served in
this example?
Does this
recommendation
require funding? How
(Expansion of Recommendation #8)
One potential task for CRE Academy would be develop a guide for districts and
schools to use to determine if policies and practices promote opportunity for all
students to learn.
(also see Page 29)
Create a training (or guide) on how to determine if your school’s or district's
discipline policy and procedures promotes the opportunity for all students to learn.
(It may be a training and a tool. The training would be about how to use this tool to
review your district’s discipline policy).
The training will do the following:
-Encourage districts to establish a shared understanding of behaviors being
addressed in the district’s discipline code (avoiding subjective definitions such as
“disrespect” or “classroom disruption”).
-Recommend schools work with key stakeholders (educators, parents, and students)
to create a code of conduct that is communicated consistently and clearly.
-Promotes restorative behavior (and minimizes punitive behavior)
-Require parents, students, and school district personnel to be involved in the annual
review of data discipline and policies to determine if there are any subgroups that
are disproportionately penalized. Possible ways of including parents and students
include forums or individualized success plans.
-Demonstrate various data schools have access to and how to incorporate plans to
address disproportionate use of suspensions into the School Improvement Plan, as
well as the district’s plan for improvement.
The training will also make the connection to
1.) Conditions of School Effectiveness, standard IX. Students’ social, emotional, and
health needs: The school creates a safe school environment and makes effective use
of a system for addressing the social, emotional, and health needs of its students
that reflects the behavioral health and public schools framework.
2.) Mass Tiered System of Support (MTSS) self assessment tool. Part of the tool is to
identify district based evidence that demonstrates how the school’s policies and
practices are adjusted using data on student achievement and participation; how
policies and practices reduce suspensions, exclusions and other discipline referrals.
This recommendation can be a part of the Behavioral Health Self Assessment or can
be linked to the MTSS self assessment.
This recommendation addresses numerous best practices and research highlighting
effective practices in promoting positive and safe learning environments and
minimizing the disproportionate use of suspensions.
Impacts all educators in districts that choose to adopt the model
Funding will be necessary to
1. create the model training and guide/tool
2. to implement the model within a district (or school)
35
did this organization
fund this? What are
potential funding
sources?
This recommendation
requires action by
which group of
stakeholders
(Highlight key
stakeholder/s
executing this
recommendation)
Describe their role.
Recommend effective
communication plan
options.
Cite any research that
supports this
recommendation or
the success of your
examples.
Potential funding sources:
1. RTTT Diversity funding and/or other state professional development funding
sources
2. Title IIA funds
_State
_Districts
_Community/Organizations
_School level
_x Associations
_Preparation Program
Description of the role:
ESE, MASS and MASC collaborate on creating a model for a district disciplinary group
that reviews discipline data for the district. The model will include the training and
the guide or tool districts would use.
If the connection is made to the Behavioral Self Assessment (which will be required
by law for all districts in 2017) and/or to MTSS Self Assessment, the organizations
could potentially build off training models in place for these assessments.
MASS and MASC would communicate this information to their constituents.
ESE could make the information available online.
Disproportional High School Suspension Rates by Race and Ethnicity. Research Brief
by Education Partnership Inc. Www.educationpartnerships.org
36
Cultural Proficiency Recommendation #4 Full Description
(Diversity Recommendation #9)
Summary of
recommendation
#9
Create a second form of Commendation School Status to recognize that school culture plays a
powerful role in student achievement. The ESE has created “Commendation School Status” to
recognize school systems for outstanding academic performance as measured by a school’s Level I
status and growth scores. Educators and school leaders are motivated by this positive incentive that
focuses on the academic aspects of education. For schools and districts to become more crossculturally proficient, a similar level of motivation and commitment is needed. Cultural proficiency is a
powerful variable in student and staff success; and, schools and districts that invest in helping people
from diverse backgrounds work together may be better equipped to recruit and retain educators of
color. The purpose of this recommendation is to encourage school and/or district leaders who are
invested in improving cultural proficiency to demonstrate their effectiveness with a set of standards
adopted by the ESE, many of which are identified in the recommendations set forth in this report (see
Full Description of Recommendations for details). A self-study process and site visit similar to that
used in accreditation programs will be implemented. School and/or district leaders will have an
opportunity to be recognized for outstanding strategies and best practices which are being
implemented in their school/district, or they might go through the process to learn more about how
to improve their knowledge and understanding.
Essential Questions
and Reflections

Given our charge to “increase the percentage of educators of color from 7.1 percent (2012) to
10.2 percent (2017),” how do we ensure that we simultaneously create the culturally proficient
environments necessary to retain our newly recruited educators of color?

How might the DESE frame the work of the Diversity Task Force so that it can be heard by all
educators? The work of the DESE Diversity Task Force presents a great opportunity for the state
to redefine what matters most. Education today is fixated on accountability and metrics; at
times, this focus is at the expense of culture and relationships, but no statistic or outcome is
lasting without a healthy school culture. Deal and Peterson (1999) remind us that “School
cultures are complex webs of traditions and rituals that have been built up over time as teachers,
students, parents, and administrators work together and deal with crises and accomplishments.
Cultural patterns are highly enduring, have a powerful impact on performance, and shape the
ways people think, act and feel.”

In what ways can we get overburdened, beleaguered educators to buy in to the
recommendations of the DESE Diversity Task Force and genuinely commit to doing the work
necessary to increase the number of educators of color and decrease the number of suspensions
for students of color? When it comes to introducing and successfully implementing something
new, timing is everything. As a superintendent of schools and a member of MASS, an
organization that has publicly requested a more thoughtful and deliberate approach to
implementing new initiatives, one might say that the conditions are not perfect – on the other
hand, neither are the metrics or the educational outcomes of all children in the Commonwealth.

If we are serious about closing proficiency gaps, then the number of teachers of color and the
suspension rates for students of color in MA as compared to their white counterparts should be a
concern for us all. Equity is an issue that we need to face, and there is no time like the present.
Yet, if we are to create the seismic shift that is needed, rather than passive compliance in this
work, it cannot be forced. Widespread change is largely dependent upon an organization’s desire
and commitment to change, and the collective willingness of individuals in the organization to
openly and honestly confront personal biases, and examine our own values, beliefs, and attitudes.
Some school leaders and educators may find this work deeply personal and very risky, and they
may tend to shy away from the effort. How can we approach this in a way that makes school
37
systems want to buy in and make a difference?

Describe your
recommendation
in detail.
If this effort is seen as a “piling on” of other initiatives (educator evaluation, RETELL, PARCC,
WIDA, etc.), it will fail. Educators who are doing their best to answer to the current demands
placed upon them may not have the capacity to add yet another area of focus to their repertoire,
particularly if it is imposed. After giving this a great deal of thought, it seems that a positive
approach is the only approach to take given the timing. The downside of the recommendation
that follows is that not all districts will opt in at the same time; the upshot is that the ones that do
will be more likely to fully commit. Just as the research on cultural proficiency warns against topdown edicts for change in a school, the DESE and the DESE Diversity Task Force should heed the
same warning. A positive approach will be our best bet to ensure that the changes we make are
sustained.
1. The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education creates another type of
Commendation School Status to recognize that school culture plays a powerful role in student
achievement. In addition to “Commendation School Status” for academic growth scores, they
create a recognition or incentive for developing cultural proficiency.
2. Every two years, the DESE/Commissioner recognizes school systems or schools in the
Commonwealth for one of the following: (1) student achievement (growth scores); and (2)
cultural proficiency.
3. The DESE and/or the DESE Diversity Task Force develops a set of performance standards (such
as the eight standards identified in item #9) that schools and districts can use to reflect the
DESE’s desired outcomes and what it means to be a school or system that is culturally
proficient or high on the culturally proficient continuum.
4. Individual schools or districts can apply for DESE Commendation School Status for Cultural
Proficiency. The application process will require the school and/or district (depending on the
application type) to engage in one year of self-study where they reflect on their practices and
answer a series of questions about their progress on a series of performance standards and
indicators.
5. This is optional for school systems; and there are no fees or costs for participation.
6. Incentives for schools and/or systems to apply include the public recognition that
accompanies Commendation School Status. Also, educators may find value in developing a
better understanding of what it means to be culturally proficient – an important aspect of the
new educator evaluation system that is also measured in the educator evaluation rubrics.
7. Timeline – (1) the DESE establishes a deadline and a team (school or district) submits an
expression of interest to the DESE to alert them of their interest in developing Commendation
Status for Cultural Proficiency in the Commonwealth; (2) the DESE sends an application
and/or link to the self-study materials (note: this should also be posted or made easily
accessible to other districts who are not yet ready to apply as a mechanism for developing an
awareness of the standards of cultural proficiency in all schools and districts); (3) the
school/district team works through a one-year self-study and documents its progress on the
standards; (4) a Commonwealth Cultural Proficiency Review Team (CCPRT) reviews the
application and conducts a site visit; (4) the CCPRT, comprising volunteer educators in the
Commonwealth, School Committee members, DESE officials, and/or DESE Diversity Task
Members, makes a recommendation to the Commissioner of Education; (5) the school or
district receives Commendation School Status for Cultural Proficiency in the Commonwealth
or receives a performance review indicating areas of strength and opportunities for growth.
8. It is important for the CCPRT to include MA school educators as it provides another
opportunity for educators serving as evaluators to learn more about what it takes to be a
culturally proficient and high-performing school system.
9. Standards of cultural proficiency could be determined by the DESE Diversity Task Force or
another body and may include items such as:
 Standard #1: Evidence that proficiency gaps are closing.
38
 Standard #2: Evidence that the school/district has an effective strategy in place to recruit,
train, and hire educators of color and has done so.
 Standard #3: Evidence that the school/district has teacher preparation programs with
supports for prospective teachers of color and curricula for working with multi-cultural
students.
 Create and sustain partnerships among educators of color;
 Create paths to connect to community and four-year colleges;
 Focus on recruiting educational assistants of color or helping them obtain a degree
and teach in the system.
 Standard #4: Evidence that the school/district has developed “a teacher pipeline” or
pathways to teaching careers that are:
 For high school students;
 For educational assistants of color to obtain a teaching degree;
 Prepare teachers of color for state licensure.
 Standard #5: Evidence that School Committee members and district and school leaders
understand and work together to create policies and practices in support of cultural
proficiency.
 Standard #6: Evidence that the school/district has established affinity groups for both
students and staff.
 Standard #7: Evidence that the school/district has a plan for implementing ongoing highquality professional development for all educators, including varied and relevant
opportunities for educators of color:
Standard #8: Evidence that the school/district has a broad-based communication plan for
building community support for its efforts.
*Standards adapted from Recruiting Minority Teachers, American Institute
for Research and Learning Points Associates, www.learningpt.org
Identify examples
(districts,
communities,
organizations, or
individuals)
demonstrating this
recommendation.
Define success for
this
recommendation.
Explain why the
example(s) is/are
deemed successful.
How many
educators or
students served (or
could potentially
be served) in this
example?
Does this
recommendation
require funding? If
so how has it been
funded? What are
This recommendation is unique to Massachusetts and not currently in effect; therefore, I am unaware
of other districts or states with similar activities. The process or model being recommended is similar
to that used in the National Blue Ribbon Schools of Excellence, NAEYC, or NEASC.
Success can be defined in many ways: (1) the number of districts who apply for and earn
Commendation School Status for Cultural Proficiency in the Commonwealth; and (2) an increase in
the number of teachers of color in a school, a district, and in the state; (3) a decrease in the rate of
suspensions for students of color relative to their white counterparts; (4) a decrease in overall
proficiency gaps for various demographic groups; (5) an increase in student achievement.
The strategy is comprehensive in that every district, school, and educator has access to a set of
performance standards that define cultural proficiency, and the system is built on incentives, rather
than punitive measures. School systems work hard to be the best, and school leaders – particularly
those in urban school systems – will be eager to be involved. It will be important for those who
develop the performance standards to also think about this strategy through the lens of the small
suburban school system, as the performance standards may prove to be even more challenging for
them.
This recommendation does not t necessarily require additional funding, although it will require time
and the reallocation of resources. The CCPRT Review Team could be voluntary or in partnership with
an existing organization or division of the DESE. Districts may have associated costs but this
opportunity for recognition is optional, so increases in professional development in this area will be a
choice and will be less likely to be viewed as an unfunded mandate.
39
potential funding
sources?
This
recommendation
requires action by
which group of
stakeholders
(Highlight key
stakeholder/s
executing this
recommendation)
Describe their role.
Recommend
effective
communication
plan options.
Describe how
stakeholders could
be informed about
this
recommendation.
Cite any research
that supports this
recommendation
or the success of
your examples.
(Include links if
available.)
X State
X Districts
_Community/Organizations
X School level
_Associations
_Preparation Program
Description of the role: The State will organize the process and oversee the development of the
performance standards, including bi-annual informational meetings designed to teach interested
schools/district leaders about the cultural proficiency and the process. Districts will be responsible for
documenting/defining what strategies or creative ideas they used to meet or exceed a performance
standard. The DESE or an organization should also make public school/district applications available
to all and create a compendium of exemplary practices.
A joint communication strategy holds the most promise for widespread change; therefore, it might be
useful to consider a collaborative communication plan that involves the DESE, MASS, and MASC.
Perhaps this could be rolled out in the fall with members of the DESE Diversity Task Force (including
Tom Scott and Glenn Koocher) presenting at the upcoming MASC/MASS Joint Conference in
November.



The AISNE Guide to Hiring and Retaining Teachers of Color, Brosnan, 2001.
Cultural Proficiency Research Brief, Walker, 2007.
Minority Teacher Recruitment, Development and Retention, the Education Alliance at Brown
University: Torres, Santos, Peck & Cortes, 2004.
40
Cultural Proficiency Recommendation #5 Full Description
(Diversity Recommendation #10)
Summary of
recommendation
#10
Describe your
recommendation
in detail.
Identify examples
(districts,
communities,
organizations, or
individuals)
demonstrating
this
recommendation.
Develop a guide for alternative practices to Zero Tolerance and Out of school Suspensions. It is
difficult to change long-standing disciplinary practices in schools. Given the disproportionate
number of out-of-school suspensions for students of color in Massachusetts, there is an urgent
need to rethink current policies and practices. A bold approach is needed to encourage school
leaders to examine new approaches to discipline. We recommend that the ESE, in collaboration
with the Massachusetts Association of School Superintendents (MASS), the Massachusetts
Association of School Committees (MASC), the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), the
Massachusetts Teachers Association (MTA), and the Massachusetts Opportunity to Learn (MOTL)
produce a guide for alternative practices to Zero Tolerance including policiesand procedures that
promote positive and restorative behavior. To encourage active use and consideration of positive
behavioral management, ESE, in collaboration with the local school districts and school
committees, will place a moratorium on all non-violent and non-drug related out of school
suspensions. The moratorium will be instituted on a date and time certain but within a period of
no less than one year to allow each locality time and space to align and implement supports for
students and teachers.
Place a moratorium on the use of out of school suspensions for ideally one year.
Connecticut’s Public Act 08-160, “An Act Concerning School Learning Environment represents a
strong model for ending the use of out-of-school suspensions in schools. The state law makes
three significant changes to the provisions of Public Act 07-66, which created a presumption in
favor of in-school suspensions and allowed out-of-school suspensions only in limited
circumstances.
1. It requires student suspensions to automatically be in-school suspensions rather than
out-of-school suspensions unless it is determined that the student poses “such a danger to
people or property, or causes such a disruption of the educational process.”
2. It postpones the implementation date of the limitation on out-of-school suspensions
from July 1, 2008 until July 1, 2009
3. It requires that, by October 1, 2008, the State Department of Education issue guidelines
to aid school districts in making determinations as to whether a suspension may be served
in-school or out-of-school.
Explain why the
example(s) is/are
deemed
successful.
How many
educators or
students served in
this example?
Does this
recommendation
require funding?
How did this
Opportunity to Learn offers a state policy guide and policy guide for school board members on
ending out-of-school suspensions with additional local and state moratorium examples. Most
educators and policy makers agree that a reform that holds great promise is additional time on
learning. This recommendation holds promise as a reduction of out-of-school suspensions should
substantially improve time on learning for all students.
All educators and students in the Commonwealth will be impacted by this recommendation as the
moratorium on out-of-school suspensions for non-violent, non-drug related infractions applies to
all school districts.
Increased funding is a possibility depending upon a district’s or school’s present level of supports.
It is reasonable to assume that in the absence of out-of-school suspensions, school systems will
need to establish alternative disciplinary practices. One possibility might be to implement a Peer
Mediation program to creatively address behavioral challenges for which students may have
41
organization fund
this? What are
potential funding
sources?
This
recommendation
requires action by
which group of
stakeholders
(Highlight key
stakeholder/s
executing this
recommendation)
Describe their
role.
Recommend
effective
communication
plan options.
Cite any research
that supports this
recommendation
or the success of
your examples.
otherwise earned an out-of-school suspension.
X State
x Community/Organizations
_ Associations
_Districts
_School level
_Preparation Program
Description of role:
(see referenced guides for examples)
If this recommendation is adopted, it will be important for the ESE to educate superintendents,
administrators, school committee members, teachers, support staff, families and care-givers about
the problem to build support for the moratorium
Connecticut’s state department of education developed comprehensive guidance to support
districts in implementing the new state law. That guidance can be found:
http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/pdf/pressroom/In_School_Suspension_Guidance.pdf
42
Summary
Describe your
recommendation in
detail.
(Recommendation #10 continued)
(See Page 41)
Create the School Leader’s Guide to Alternative Practices and Policies to Zero
Tolerance
Identify examples
(districts,
communities,
organizations, or
individuals)
demonstrating this
recommendation.
Explain why the
example(s) is/are
deemed successful.
This guide would provide school leaders and stakeholders with alternative
approaches and practices to Zero Tolerance that they can employ to support
students and create positive learning environments.
How many educators
or students served in
this example?
Does this
recommendation
require funding? How
did this organization
fund this? What are
potential funding
sources?
This recommendation
requires action by
which group of
stakeholders
(Highlight key
stakeholder/s
executing this
recommendation)
Describe their role.
Recommend effective
communication plan
options.
Cite any research that
supports this
recommendation or
the success of your
examples.
Impact all educators in districts that have Zero Tolerance Policies.
(Uncertain as to how many districts/schools have zero tolerance policies)
Guides are useful tools for districts to reference and make changes without the
added expense of external training. Research consistently shows that zero tolerance
policies do not have a positive impact on student behavior.
Funding will be necessary to
(Potentially) Train educators in Classroom Management.
However, the guide could highlight alternatives that do not require additional
training.
Funding will be needed to create the guide
_State
_Community/Organizations
_x Associations & Unions
_Districts
_School level
_Preparation Program
Description of the role:
ESE and Associations can create a model drawing on existing practices or
alternatives.
Local LEAs can collaborate on identifying the policies and practices that they will
employ.
Associations and MASS can share this information with members.
ESE could make the information available online.
Indiana Education Policy Center’s Preventing School Violence: A Practical Guide to
Comprehensive Planning http://www.indiana.edu/~safeschl/psv.pdf (p.29)
“Discipline is Always Teaching”:Effective Alternatives to Zero Tolerance in Indiana’s
Schools http://ceep.indiana.edu/projects/PDF/PB_V2N3_Discipline_is_Teaching.pdf
43