Quality Public Education for All New Jersey Students

 

 
     Pre 2012 Announcement Archives
     2012-13 Announcement Archives
     2013-14 Announcement Archives
     2014-15 Announcement Archives
     Old Announcements prior April 2009
     ARCHIVE inc 2007 Announcements
     2009 Archives
     2008 Archives
     2007 Archives
     2006 Archives
     2010-11 Announcements
     2005 through Jan 30 2006 Announcements
GSCS Officers Testify on QSAC Issues
GSCS Treasurer, Chuck Sampson and GSCS Officer-at-Large, Jorden Schiff recently testified on QSAC issues at the invitation of Senate Education Committee Chair Teresa Ruiz. Both recommended a review of the goals and objectives of QSAC, as well as extending the rotation time of QSAC monitoring from 3 to 7 years for districts that have met certain levels of QSAC ratings. Their testimony is attached, click on More here to read

Testimony to the Senate Education Committee

Monday, March 24, 2014

Charles B. Sampson

Superintendent of Schools

Freehold Regional High School District

 

NJQSAC remarks

 

Thank you Chairwoman Ruiz and members of the Senate Education Committee for allowing me the opportunity to provide testimony regarding the New Jersey Quality Single Accountability Continuum. I know that we all realize the importance of ensuring that an accountability system that serves as a tool to validate, support and, when necessary, question the organizational capacity and effectiveness of a public school system is an important component to guaranteeing a vibrant education for all of New Jersey’s students. For the past three years I have served as the Superintendent of the Freehold Regional High School system, a high performing school district encompassing six high schools and serving approximately 11,600 students located in Monmouth County. I also serve as the Treasurer of the Garden State Coalition of Schools, representing over 80 school districts across the state.

 

QSAC, as currently constructed is designed to measure organizational effectiveness in five broad categories including Instruction and Program, Fiscal Management, Governance, Personnel and Operations. QSAC monitoring includes an intensive district self-study followed by a site visitation that occurs every three years. I would like to posit today that the current legislation sponsored by Senator Bateman  (S135) and Senator Kean (S721), extending the QSAC cycle beyond three years, would benefit high performing school districts and limit redundancy in reporting requirements for New Jersey’s public schools. Extending the timeline for the QSAC process makes good sense as significant components of QSAC are provided to the state and federal authorities in other venues. Moving beyond the scope of the three year monitoring window would alleviate unnecessary bureaucracy, allowing a more efficient use of administrative time allowing school district leaders to focus on what truly matters- student outcomes.

 

In my three years as Superintendent of the Freehold Regional High School District our school district has undergone significant monitoring including : consolidated sub grant monitoring that examined various elements of our title I, title II, career and technical, IDEA, and special education programs and consisted of no less than 12 DOE officials spending parts of four days in our district, a survey audit for post-secondary students with disabilities; a specific title I audit; QSAC in January 2013  and an audit of our home instruction and alternative education programs by the office of the state auditor. Additionally, we have presented an annual testing report to the public, undergone an annual financial audit, and presented our violence and vandalism numbers twice each year, this year including our HIB grade. We have also submitted or will submit extensive data to the state in preparation for AchieveNJ through NJSMART including staff certification data and graduation cohort data. Our mid-year budget reviews with the county office have necessitated an explanation of how and what resources are being deployed to various initiatives including the Common Core, PARCC testing and our new teacher evaluation mandates. Finally, we have continued our Middle States accreditation throughout this cycle with midyear visitations and the beginning of a self-study for district accreditation. I share this with you because a great deal of the data required within all of the above mentioned occurrences is duplicated within QSAC. The fiscal management component of QSAC encompasses much if not all of the work done in preparation for the annual audit. The operations category contains requirements regarding violence and vandalism. The instruction and program category contains graduation data, and information regarding curriculum development aligned to the common core that is submitted to the state in other venues. The personnel component of QSAC is now captured almost entirely within NJSMART. In one extreme example, one of the categories in QSAC is to print and present a screenshot from an NJSMART submission that demonstrates reporting deadlines with fewer than 2% error. Certainly this data is already available to the state. Given this significant overlap, an extension of the QSAC timelines beyond three years, particularly for school districts already designated as high performing and a thorough examination that builds upon the recommendations of the 2011-2012 Education Task Force would be advantageous to schools across the state.

 

Indeed with the advent of an entirely new system of student assessment with PARCC, it might be time to rethink QSAC entirely to identify core metrics as indicators of organizational health and effectiveness that focus on student outputs. With the rapid expanse of NJSMART, introduction of new performance reports and new systems of evaluating and monitoring staff and student achievement, QSAC, even with the revisions adopted in 2012, has become a dated tool that fails to most effectively gauge the broad range of avenues that school systems may provide to engender student success. The extensions called for in S135 and S721 would allow for the opportunity to explore ways to make QSAC more effective in assisting school districts in focusing on student outcomes.

 

Milton Chen stated that modern learning necessitates the utilization of modern tools. The compliance checklist nature of QSAC ignores more authentic indicators of a successful school system and overly burdens districts that have repeatedly performed at the highest levels. As we reset the playing field to incorporate the new mandates as established by state and federal authorities, we should look also to develop a new tool that recognizes the distinctions and nuanced differences amongst public schools while providing metrics of growth not found in other reports already provided by school districts in other reporting requirements. I am heartened that there seems the possibility on some real movement regarding the QSAC process and would welcome the opportunity to contribute to the determination of a more modern tool to support and validate modern learning.

______________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

Testimony to the Senate Education Committee

Committee Room 6

1st Floor of the State House Annex

Monday, March 24, 2014 at 10:00 am

Jorden Schiff, Ed.D

Superintendent of Schools

Hillsborough Township Board of Education

 

Chairwoman Ruiz and members of the Senate Education Committee, it is my honor and pleasure to give testimony today regarding the New Jersey Quality Single Accountability Continuum, commonly known as QSAC.  My name is Dr. Jorden Schiff and I am the proud superintendent of the Hillsborough Township Public Schools.  Located in Somerset County, Hillsborough is a High Performing prek-12 district with nine schools, 1200 employees, 7,300 students, and an annual budget of close to $110 million.  I have served as superintendent since January of 2011 and have completed one full QSAC cycle.  Prior to Hillsborough, I served as superintendent of the Readington Township Public Schools for over four years and completed two cycles of QSAC monitoring. I am also currently serving as Officer-at-Large to the Garden State Coalition of Schools.

The Department of Education plays a critical role in monitoring local districts to ensure that administration and the Board of Education are following all state laws and regulations.  When a district fails to meet the “High Performing” standard of QSAC, additional monitoring and corrective action is necessary.  Districts that fail to provide a rigorous curriculum, high fiscal management standards, proper personnel procedures, and appropriate governmental oversight must be closely monitored by the Department of Education, in order to make certain the students are well served.

I have had the privilege to work in High Performing districts where the QSAC process is taken very seriously.  Our process begins with a self-assessment in the areas of Instruction and Program, Fiscal Management, Governance, Personnel, and Operations.  Documents are then cross-checked against the performance indicators or DPR’s (District Performance Review).  These documents are then shared with a committee of individuals representing the teachers, parents, Board, and administration who determine whether the district could document the DPR adequately.  I then review the work of the committees and certify the self-evaluation.  The Executive County Superintendent, Business Administrator, and the Education Specialist from the County Office completes a site visit and determines the accuracy of the self-evaluation by reviewing documents, interviewing staff, and inspecting the facilities. 

Although this is important work, it does consume many hours of local staff’s time and the county office’s time, as well.  I am concerned that the frequency, every three years, is not necessary for “High Performing Districts.”  If a district performs well through the QSAC monitoring process, then the district should be able to be monitored every seven years, rather than every three years.  The time that local districts spend every three years preparing for monitoring could be better spent focusing on the teaching and learning process.  The Executive County Superintendent’s office could better focus on needy districts, rather than monitor High Performing Districts every three years.  The County Superintendents are now responsible for multiple counties when a few short years ago were responsible for only one county.  With many more districts falling under fewer county superintendents, it becomes critical that their time be spent where it is needed most, with districts who struggle to meet the QSAC DPR’s.

There is a bill, however, that is currently making its way through the legislative process that will positively address this concern.  Senator Bateman’s bill, S135, permits high performing school districts to be monitored by the DOE every seven years rather than every three years.  This common sense legislation recognizes that not all districts need to be painted with such a broad brush.  High Performing districts could spend more time with their students and less time documenting compliance, while the county offices could focus their scarce time on the districts needing their assistance the most.

Once again, I appreciate your time and attention, and I look forward to your questions.