Sandra’s Top 3 Favorite Memories with the State Board

I began working for the State Board as a Policy Fellow in February 2020, and was fortunate enough to spend a few weeks in the office before the COVID-19 pandemic began. It was one of my favorite professional experiences, and I’m so grateful to have had the opportunity to engage with educational issues in the District firsthand. When the pandemic started, I felt like our work at the State Board became about so much more than just school—it became about meeting families’ basic needs, finding ways of learning that work for everyone, and addressing equity issues head-on. While this has been a difficult situation, I’ve been able to see how all of these concerns intersect and what we as a State Board can do to improve things for others. Education policy is complex, but I’ve seen that there are people who care about serving students and families above all else, and who will work to create a more equitable world however they can. 

I hope to bring all of the experiences, learning moments, and professional growth from my time at the State Board along with me. With that, here are my top three favorite memories from my time at the State Board:

  1. Bubble tea outing

We had a Working Session during my first week at the State Board, and to prep for these meetings, the team would often take a quick afternoon walk to grab some coffee or tea to fuel up for the evening ahead. This time, we got some bubble tea from a nearby spot, which was a great pick-me-up during a bleak winter afternoon. It was such a fun way to get to know everyone and be welcomed into the team right away.

  1. Tour of Educational Programming at D.C. Jail

Working at the State Board means that you often get to do site visits at schools across the District. We were lucky enough to get a tour of the educational programs offered at the D.C. Jail, which was a new initiative only begun in the past couple of years. The most impactful thing for me was talking directly with the inmates and hearing how they felt about the educational programs. They spoke highly of the classes offered in partnership with local universities, the technical skills they learned that they’d be able to use as soon as they re-entered the workforce, and the positive impact their professors had on them. We also got to tour the library in the building. D.C. Public Library has a partnership with D.C. Jail, which means they treat the library the same as any other branch in the city, full stocking it with thousands of titles.

  1. State Board Public Meetings

I’m lucky that I was able to experience a few public meetings in person before we had to shift to holding them remotely. It was inspiring to see so many District residents spending time after work to advocate for issues that mattered to them. When our meetings shifted online and we had many more public witnesses sign up than usual, I was humbled by how some of them stayed online until 9 or 10 pm at night to share their thoughts with us. Constituents are engaged, resourceful, and hardworking, and it was a privilege to be able to interact with them in this way. Their vital role in education policy, and the policymaking process in general, is something I will take with me wherever I go in public service.

State Board Staff Share Teacher Retention Findings at 11th Annual DC Data Summit

By Simone Wright, Policy Fellow

On July 22, 2020, Ward 4 Representative and Teacher Retention Committee Chairperson, Frazier O’ Leary, and policy staff, Alexander Jue, Darren Fleischer, and Simone Wright shared findings with DC Public School (DCPS) and public charter school teachers, leaders, and staff at the 11th Annual DC Data Summit. The State Board’s goals during its 90-minute session were to build awareness around teacher attrition challenges and start to brainstorm next steps to address this challenge across the District of Columbia. 

The DC State Board of Education (SBOE) started to explore challenges around teacher and principal retention in May 2018, by contracting with local education researcher, Mary Levy, to produce a report around which public-school teachers are leaving their schools in the District. The State Board’s October 2018 report functioned as a primer for deeper investigation. 

In December 2019, the State Board partnered with an independent survey researcher, Bayne LLC, to administer a 70+ question electronic/online survey to 2,000 (250 responses received) recently exited teachers, as well as to conduct qualitative focus groups (22 participants) and 13 follow-up interviews. The goal of this survey research was to determine why teachers were leaving their schools and what could have potentially kept them at their schools. 

In March of 2020, the State Board published these survey results in the 2020 D.C. Teacher Attrition Survey

Presenting at the DC Data Summit allowed the State Board staff to increase awareness across the District around one of its key priority areas. In developing this virtual session, the State Board set out to gather information that may not have been accounted for in the current study, while seeking feedback on how to support organizations and agencies across the District to address teacher attrition.

The State Board’s approach to gathering insight from participants was to utilize small group discussions. Participants in each group shared their initial reactions to the data  shared by the State Board’s two Policy Analysts, Alexander Jue and Darren Fleischer, then transitioned to thinking through how they could address teacher attrition in the District, their LEAs, and their schools. As small group facilitators, the State Board’s policy staff built in time for participants to provide the State Board with feedback around information that was not currently considered in the study. 

Participants brought an array of perspectives to the conversation due to their various roles and backgrounds—from teachers across different LEAs to analysts and data gurus from different agencies and organizations in the District. Initial reactions from participants varied from curiosity to familiarity. Each small group seemed to have a high level of engagement: some groups were a space to raise more questions and others provided additional context or solutions to moving the work forward in addressing teacher attrition. Much dialogue raised how lack of teacher support contributes to teachers leaving the profession. This reaction very much aligns with the research shared by research entities like the Learning Policy Institute (LPI) around causes of teacher attrition on a national scale. One small group shared how DCPS could use roles outside of administration to fill gaps in teacher support.

In the small group discussions, participants inquired about administration as a lever for change in terms of addressing teacher attrition. More explicitly, they questioned the rationale for digging into teacher evaluation and not administration evaluation. Participants shared the need to be more descriptive around what is meant or necessary in terms of “support” for teachers around workload or culture. One of the most insightful charges to the State Board was to revisit this study with considerations around the impact of COVID-19. The pandemic is bringing about numerous challenges for teachers, as the State Board and other key education stakeholders are currently deciding the most effective mode for students to participate in school. 

The State Board would love your thought partnership in addressing teacher attrition in the District of Columbia, especially considering the potential impact that COVID-19 has had on exasperating this particular challenge. The State Board is grateful for the active engagement and varied perspectives we received from participants in our session and encourages members of the public to attend our Teacher Retention Committee meetings via our YouTube Channel and sending any insights or questions via email to sboe@dc.gov.

School Climate in the District and Beyond

By Sandra Mansour, Policy Fellow

School climate has always been an important area in education, but given the global COVID-19 pandemic, education officials are giving this area of schooling increasingly more attention. School climate does not refer to whether a school’s temperature is hot or cold, as the name might entail. Rather, while there is no single definition for school climate, it is commonly understood as encompassing the learning environment—how respected and supported students feel in schools, how much they feel like they belong at their school, and how safe they feel in their school. 

Policymakers believe schools that were already focused on improving their school climate may be in a better position to deal with the pandemic because those educators have experience in creating supportive learning environments and maintaining relationships with their students and families. School climate also includes areas such as students’ social-emotional wellbeing or the availability of mental health services. Research has shown that a strong school climate is associated with many positive educational outcomes for students, such as increased attendance, engagement, and learning. It can even counteract the negative effects of poverty on academic achievement.

Under the 2015 federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), every state must evaluate a school on at least one school success/school quality (SQSS) measure and states have the discretion in deciding how to measure SQSS. In some states, the SQSS measures include a quantitative and/or qualitative evaluation of “school climate” (as defined above), like a survey.

Some states have included school climate surveys as the way to measure SQSS in their state-based accountability frameworks, while others have not included surveys in the official framework, but use them to guide school improvement efforts. Some states are wary about the accuracy of surveys to reflect the true quality of schools, and therefore do not implement them at all. 

According to the National Association of State Board of Education (NASBE), as of January 2020, eight states officially use school climate surveys in their accountability frameworks: Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, and South Carolina. In these states, the surveys only account for about 5–10 percent of the accountability formula, which is a way of taking the results into account but not giving them too much weight in the final school ratings, as surveys are a relatively new tool. In half of these states, school climate surveys are the only way states measure SQSS. In the other half, school climate surveys are paired with other school climate measures, such as chronic absenteeism, college and career readiness, or access to a well-rounded curriculum.

Other states focus on other measures of school climate or implement different initiatives to lead improvement efforts. Rhode Island, for example, includes student suspension rates as part of its SQSS indicator. The goal is not to punish schools for high suspension rates but rather to enable their education department to provide schools with resources that reduce the need for disciplinary actions like suspensions. Such resources might include mental health services, mentoring, school counseling, and positive behavioral interventions.

Minnesota established a School Safety Technical Assistance Center within their education department to implement statewide bullying prevention and evidence-based social-emotional learning (SEL). The Center (now called the School Climate Center) provides training, technical assistance, and guidance to support district efforts, including school climate initiatives in rural districts. The initiatives include professional development for culturally responsive SEL, equitable discipline policies emphasizing restorative practices, and mental health services.

Pennsylvania launched a School Climate Leadership Initiative in order to support education leaders in improvement efforts. The initiative helped build leadership capacity and established a leadership network at the school and district level by working with the National School Climate Center and with regional resource centers. The state encourages—but does not require—schools to use its school climate survey and has recently passed legislation that requires school safety and assessment criteria to include trauma-informed education, behavioral health, suicide and bullying prevention, and substance use.

Over the past few years, D.C. schools have administered a variety of school climate surveys. Starting in 2016, the D.C. Council passed the Youth Suicide Prevention and School Climate Survey Amendment Act, which required the Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE) to pilot school climate surveys in schools and develop a plan for implementing the surveys in all schools serving grades 6–12—both traditional public schools and public charter schools—beginning in school year 2020–21. A 2020 report from OSSE includes a list of high quality surveys that could be used and next steps that should be taken to support schools in fully administering school climate surveys.

Meanwhile, D.C. Public Schools (DCPS) currently administers the Panorama Survey to students, teachers, and staff, and has been doing so since the 2017–18 school year. The survey asks about SEL, school climate, school satisfaction, and engagement. Separately, in school years 2017–18 and 2018–19, Wilson High School individually piloted the School Climate Assessment Instrument (SCAI), which was found to have the highest predictive validity of any school climate survey. Anacostia High School, Beer Elementary School, and Ketcham Elementary School followed suit and administered SCAI in the 2019–20 school year.  

By focusing on the whole child and the entire school experience, the District and states across the nation are on their way to improving learning for every student.

Photo Credit: By Kobe Michael via Pexels

Sarah’s Top 5 Favorite Moments at the State Board

By Sarah Arrington, Policy Fellow

I started my policy fellowship with the State Board in September 2019. Since my first day, I have grown professionally and as an advocate for equitable education. Through supporting the State Board’s public meetings I’ve learned the importance of elevating the community’s voice in all aspects of public education. Through conducting and synthesizing research on the issues raised by community members I’ve learned what it means to put in the work to create change. And through the support of my team, I’ve learned what it feels like to be surrounded by people who are fierce advocates for the community that they serve.

I will miss my team and working for the State Board and I will always be grateful for the opportunities and guidance they have given me over the past year. Here are some of my favorite moments from my time at the State Board:

  1. Coffee outings

On days when we had long meetings ahead of us, the staff would walk to a coffee shop nearby to fuel up on caffeine. Well, actually I am not a huge caffeine fan as my coworkers will tell you, but those outings were great opportunities to bond with my coworkers and to prepare for the State Board’s public meetings. We went to different coffee shops including Starbucks and Compass Coffee, but my favorite was our outing to Sharetea to get bubble tea. It was experiences like these that infused joy into the culture of our office.

2. School visits

Each month, the State Board and staff took trips to local schools to engage with the school’s community. These trips are some of my favorite memories because they allowed me to interact with the people whom I serve through my work. The visits were an opportunity to hear directly from the community about the work schools do to support students and the challenges they might be facing. One of the most memorable school visits was to the Ron Brown College Preparatory High School, an all-boys school in Ward 7. We were able to talk to students about the programs and support their school provides them as well as their plans for the future. It was clear that cared deeply for their school and their community. The school visits reminded me of the hard work that schools put in to help their students succeed.

3. #LunchTimeLive

When COVID-19 struck and we were forced to start working from home, the State Board quickly came up with a new plan to ensure that community voices were still heard during this unprecedented time. The result of the plan was to hold our first ever Instagram Live event, which we called #LunchTimeLive. For the first #LunchTimeLive, we invited students and teachers to join Social Studies Standards Committee Chair and Ward 6 Representative, Jessica Sutter, to discuss their experiences with social studies in the District. The event gave us great insight into the community’s thoughts about the social studies standards and what the State Board should be doing to change them. The event also showed me how dynamic the State Board is when it comes to shifting its work and procedures to better serve the community.

Continue reading “Sarah’s Top 5 Favorite Moments at the State Board”

Elevating Student Voice in the Creation of the New Social Studies Standards

By Sarah Arrington, Policy Fellow

The State Board’s Social Studies Standards Committee, chaired by Jessica Sutter, the Ward 6 Representative, is leading the District’s effort to revise the statewide social studies standards. The standards have not been updated since 2006 and are thought to be Eurocentric and exclusive of many cultures’ histories. In the Social Studies Committee’s effort to make the standards more inclusive and reflective of the racial and social backgrounds of DC students, the committee has taken steps to ensure the inclusion of student voice.

On March 24, the State Board held its first #LunchTimeLive event on Instagram Live. The event featured five DC students who shared their experiences with social studies and what they would like to see in the new standards.

Two students discussed the need to emphasize the experience of black communities. Kayla Higgs, a senior at Eastern High School and a member of Mikva Challenge, suggested that the standards should include a broader emphasis on the experience of black people rather than focusing only on slavery. Specifically, she advocated for including lessons on black culture before Africans were taken to the Americas as well as mass incarceration and President Obama’s election. Michael Blackson, a senior at Thurgood Marshall Academy and a member of Mikva Challenge and Pathways 2 Power, recommended that the standards should include black history outside of Black History Month in February. He also recommended more action civics and student engagement with the community.

Jada Epps, a junior at Thurgood Marshall Academy and member of Pathways 2 Power, discussed how she had the opportunity to learn about civil rights history at sites where history unfolded. This is especially relevant to DC because it is a city rich with historical sites that could be used for hands-on learning experiences. And finally, Cristian Cardona, a sophomore at Banneker High School and a member of Mikva Challenge, called for the new standards to implement relevant social studies topics in earlier grades so that students are exposed to the topics with enough time to become civically involved in their community.

The State Board also held a student panel at the April Public Meeting. The virtual panel consisted of three of the State Board’s Student Advisory Committee (SAC) members. They shared similar thoughts and suggestions as the students at the #LunchTimeLive event regarding the need for more inclusive standards.

Alex O’Sullivan, a Student Representative for the State Board and sophomore at BASIS DC Public Charter School, stated, “I’d like to see more modern social studies curriculum like learning about urban housing, modern day segregation in schools, police brutality and racial profiling.” Dayja Burton, a Student Representative for the State Board and a senior at McKinley Technology High School, stated, “by adding experiences of other cultures to the curriculum, students will be able to learn on a global level and be more open-minded and inclusive.” Shayla Dell, a sophomore at Duke Ellington School of the Arts and a member of the State Board’s Student Advisory Committee, stated, “I’ve always felt the lack of perspective from people of color in social studies. Misrepresentation leaves people confused.”

At both events, the students’ passion for social justice impressed the board members. The Social Studies Standards Committee will be incorporating the students’ feedback throughout the process of updating the standards. The students’ key insights confirm the need for community participation in the creation of the new standards. The Board will continue to solicit community feedback to ensure that the people who will be most affected by the standards will have a voice in creating them. 

The next step in the standards creation process is to assemble a Standards Advisory Committee which will develop guiding principles for the new standards and advise the Board on what should be included in the standards. The application for the committee is live until Friday, June 12 at 12 p.m. ET. Find it here.

SBOE #EdPolicy Roundup: May 2020—COVID-19 Effects on Teacher Evaluations and Learning Loss

By Sandra Mansour and Sarah Arrington

This month, the D.C. State Board of Education (SBOE) continues its efforts to make education research and policy concepts accessible to all stakeholders in our communities. The May 2020 #EdPolicy Research Roundup features two reports: one from National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ), which examines teacher evaluations and support during COVID-19 and one from the Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA), which examines the impact of school closures during the current health emergency on student achievement.

As we have done in previous posts, the State Board will discuss the key findings of each report and explain the implications on the State Board’s work and priorities.

“Teacher evaluations and support during COVID-19 closures,” National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ), May 2020

Summary: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ) examined 44 school districts’ teacher evaluation methods. So far, only 18 districts have agreements that mention how they will approach teacher evaluations in the context of distance learning and school closures. Of those 18, only 13 districts have come to a decision about how they will proceed. The three common responses NCTQ has found include: 1) suspend the evaluation process for the rest of the 2019-20 school year; 2) keep only formative evaluations for this school year; or 3) issue summative evaluations when possible.

Seven districts have decided to move forward with summative evaluations for teachers that had enough evidence before school closures, including Chicago, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, and Seattle. If a school did not have enough evidence of a teacher’s ability before the closures started, the school will either cancel or delay their evaluation of that teacher. Three districts—Albuquerque, Boston, and Dallas—will proceed with formative evaluations, meaning they will use the data they’ve already collected to give teachers support and feedback, but will not issue an evaluation rating. The other three districts have stopped the teacher evaluation process altogether for this school year.

While districts may not be giving teachers formal ratings, NCTQ believes that it is crucially important that districts continue to give their teachers feedback and support. Distance learning during COVID-19 school closures have presented both teachers and students with a brand-new learning environment, and NCTQ believes that teachers need guidance to continue quality instruction. Ideally, this support would also continue once teachers and students return to physical classrooms.

State Board Context: The D.C. State Board of Education has heard testimony from District residents and reviewed research which both suggest that the rate of teacher attrition in the District, 25 percent, is higher than the national average which is only 16 percent. The State Board is dedicated to further understanding the cause of this high teacher turnover rate and what can be done to improve it. The State Board’s most recent work on teacher retention is a survey which was sent to over 2,000 recently exited teachers. The survey explored why teachers voluntarily resigned or quit their position at a school, sector, or profession entirely. The independently contracted survey researcher also held focus groups and follow-up interviews to ascertain what could have been done to help the teachers stay at their school. The survey report found that:

  • IMPACT, the teacher evaluation system, was the primary departure driver in DCPS
  • Burdens of work culture and workload were primary departure reasons in public charter schools
  • Lack of support for teacher safety and mental health led to departure
  • Tensions with school leaders created hostile work environments

The State Board recognizes that the current global pandemic will likely exacerbate the pre-existing issues that District teachers face, like the effect of teacher evaluations such as IMPACT on teacher attrition. Local education agencies (LEAs) should evaluate how they will approach teacher evaluations during this time of distance learning. It is imperative that teachers continue to receive support and guidance throughout online learning and during the adjustment back to in-person learning. In its May Public Meeting, the State Board discussed a resolution that would ask the Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE) to consider implementing a statewide professional development program for both teachers with less than five years of experience and school-level leadership. The State Board will revisit it in its June Public Meeting and will continue to hear testimony from teachers so that it can support them in providing all students in the District with the best education possible.

“The COVID-19 slide: What summer learning loss can tell us about the potential impact of school closures on student academic achievement,” NWEA, April 2020

Summary: As the school year comes to a close in most places, researchers are trying to make educated guesses about how the COVID-19 pandemic will exacerbate opportunity gaps in education among students and widen the achievement gap. This NWEA research brief looked at seasonal patterns of learning loss in order to make projections about COVID-19 learning losses. Past seasonal learning research findings include three key trends: achievement typically declines over the summer months, declines are usually steeper for math than for reading, and the extent of loss increases in higher grades.

NWEA used historical data on summer learning loss and a national sample of over five million students, grades 3–8, who took growth assessments in the 2017–18 school year, to project possible learning loss in mathematics and reading for 3rd through 8th grade learners. While these models predict learning loss, the study acknowledges that summer learning loss data is different from distance learning data, since it is assumed that students are not receiving instruction during the summer. Researchers also extrapolated data as a starting point for distance learning losses. From data, they created two projections: a COVID-19 slowdown, where students would maintain the same level of academic achievement exhibited when schools closed (set as March 15, 2020), and a COVID-19 slide, where they projected the typical academic setbacks of the summer, but starting at the March 15 closure. The COVID-19 slowdown showed lower scores compared to where students would have ended on the typical last day of school. The COVID-19 slide suggested even worse learning loss than traditional summer learning loss because both declines started with lower March scores.

These projections suggest major academic setbacks for students from COVID-19 closures, especially in math. COVID-19 slide estimates predict that students will return to school in fall 2020 with roughly 70 percent of their learning gains for reading, and 50 percent of their learning gains for math, relative to a typical school year. Some grades suggest that students could return nearly a full year behind in math.

State Board Context: The State Board is committed to ensuring that all D.C. students have equal access to educational opportunities in order to be successful in school and prepared for their future careers. Specifically, this means that the State Board strives to hear from underrepresented student populations like students considered at-risk, students experiencing homelessness, students who identify as LGBTQ, and students with other unique requirements. In order to support these student groups, the State Board has been collecting information and hearing from constituents about how COVID-19 closures have impacted student learning. As distance learning may be needed in the next school year, the State Board will continue to assess the current learning environment so that its work continues to examine the pandemic’s effects on student achievement and outcomes.  

State Board Visit to D.C. Department of Corrections

By Emily Gasoi, Ward 1 Representative

On February 6, 2020, the State Board team visited the Department of Corrections’ (DOC) Central Detention Facility (CDF). Upon arrival, we were greeted by Director Quincy Booth, Deputy Director of Professional Development & College and Career Readiness, Amy Lopez, and Public Information Officer, Dr. Keena Blackmon. Before beginning the tour, Director Booth and Deputy Director Lopez gave us a quick overview of D.C. Jail.

For starters, they emphasized that the terms “jail” and “prison” are not interchangeable. Jails are facilities for those who are awaiting trial or have committed minor offenses while prisons tend to be facilities for those who have been convicted and have longer sentences. This means that D.C. Jail’s population is rather transient—some residents are housed for as short as a day, week, or month, while some are housed for several months or years. Consequently, while Director Booth and Deputy Director Lopez have invested heavily over the past two years to develop and implement educational opportunities and programs for all of their residents, a persistent challenge is how to ensure that their residents are gaining valuable skills, certifications, or even degrees before they leave.

Furthermore, Ms. Lopez discussed how one barrier is the building itself—there is one building unit in CDF that has no windows and little space. It is hard to expand programs when the building was not designed with classrooms in mind. However, despite these challenges, it seems that many of the educational initiatives are making a difference. We heard from residents enrolled in a number of the programs and they really impressed upon us how meaningful these opportunities are to them—like a window on the world that they hope to re-enter with new and immediately applicable skills. Here are a few examples:

Continue reading “State Board Visit to D.C. Department of Corrections”

SBOE #EdPolicy Roundup: February 2020 – Science of Reading & Homeless Youth

By Sarah Arrington, Policy Fellow

This month, the D.C. State Board of Education (SBOE) continues its efforts to make education research and policy concepts accessible to all stakeholders in our communities. The
February 2020 #EdPolicy Research Roundup features two reports: one from National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ), which examines teacher preparation programs and one from the National Center for Homeless Education, which assesses the prevalence of homeless students in the United States.

As we have done previously, the State Board will discuss the key findings of each report and explain the implications on the State Board’s work and priorities.

“2020 Teacher Prep Review: Program Performance in Early Reading Instruction” National Council on Teacher Quality, January 2020

Summary: This report explains the National Council on Teacher Quality’s (NCTQ) findings of teacher preparation programs’ adherence to the science of reading. The “science of reading” refers to methods of reading instruction that have been proven successful by research. To assess whether teachers are actually acquiring the skills to teach the science of reading, NCTQ looked at programs’ required readings and assignments, syllabi, lecture topics, textbooks, and opportunities to practice. Researchers looked for evidence of dedicated course time to the five components of reading: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. They also looked for measures to hold teacher candidates accountable for learning each component. Some of their key findings include:

Continue reading “SBOE #EdPolicy Roundup: February 2020 – Science of Reading & Homeless Youth”

“The Best Team in District Government” – Matt’s Top 5 Moments at the State Board

By Matt Repka, Policy Analyst

I first started at the State Board in late 2017. Since then, I’ve been on staff for 28 working sessions, 27 task force meetings, 26 public meetings, three performance oversight hearings, two budget oversight hearings, and one public forum on teacher retention. Throughout this time, the State Board has continued to develop as an institution, expanding its reach to take on important issues of equity in education in the District.

One thing I’ve appreciated about the State Board is its ability to work in collaboration with District’s education institutions on policy matters, including compliance with federal law, while maintaining the independent status that allows it to serve as a conduit for the voices of residents interested in addressing important issues in their school communities.

This is my final week at the State Board, and I’ll really miss the team here. It’s been a wonderful opportunity to support the State Board members in thinking about the most critical challenges in public education. But as a District resident myself, I’m looking forward to keeping in touch with the State Board and hearing about the office’s ongoing projects—this time as a constituent.

Before I go, here’s a reflection on my five favorite things about my State Board tenure:

5. Representing the State Board at EdFEST

Collage of two photos. The left is of Matt standing next to a mascot of Abraham Lincoln in a Washington Nationals jersey. The left photo is of Matt and Alex tabling at EdFEST.
Tabling at EdFEST!

Continue reading ““The Best Team in District Government” – Matt’s Top 5 Moments at the State Board”

SBOE #EdPolicy Roundup: January 2020 – Social Studies & Civics

By Sarah Arrington, Policy Fellow

In the new year, the D.C. State Board of Education will continue its “Research Roundup” series in an effort to increase the focus on selected education research and policy concepts, with a specific emphasis on the implications of research and policy on stakeholders in our communities.

This January 2020 #EdPolicy Research Roundup features two reports: one from the Center for American Progress that examines state civics requirements and one from the National Congress of American Indians that examines state efforts to implement high-quality curriculum about Native American people and culture.

As we have done previously, the State Board will discuss the key findings of each report and explain the implications on the State Board’s work and priorities.

This month, both reports relate to social studies and civics. The State Board is currently embarking on a process to update the District’s social studies standards under the leadership of Ward 6 Representative Jessica Sutter. The state social studies standards have not been updated since 2006.

Continue reading “SBOE #EdPolicy Roundup: January 2020 – Social Studies & Civics”