A r c h i v e d  I n f o r m a t i o n

Washington, DC 20208-7564

Minutes of Quarterly Meeting

January 20, 2000

Location
80 F St. NW, Room 100
Washington, DC 20208-7564

Members Present

Members Absent
James E. Bottoms
Lea Schelke

Ex Officio Members Present
C. Kent McGuire, OERI
Eric Hamilton, NSF (delegate)
Douglas Herbert, NEA (delegate)
Bruce Fuchs, NIH (delegate)

Designated Federal Official
Thelma Leenhouts

Board Staff Present
Eve M. Bither
Mary Grace Lucier

OERI Staff Present
Ron Anson, Margo Anderson, Sue Betka, Carol Chelemer, Stephanie Dalton, Greg Dennis, Beth Fine, Jim Fox, Gil Garcia, Peirce Hammond, Harold Himmelfarb, Sharon Horn, Cheryl Kane, Naomi Karp, Sue Klein, Barbara Lieb, Holly Martinez, Oliver Moles, Fritz Moser, Eileen O?Brien, Marty Orland, Ron Pedone, Gary Phillips, Ivor Pritchard, Judith Segal, Lynn Spencer, Nevzer Stacy, Robert Stonehill, Karen Suagee, Duc Le Tho

U. S. Department of Education Staff Present

Sandra Furey, Planning and Evaluation Service

Members of the Public Present

Gerald Sroufe, AERA
Tom Glennan, RAND
Bill Morrill, MathTech
Denise McKeon, National Education Association
Carol Pistorino

Chairman Hakuta called the meeting to order at 9 a.m. and reviewed the meeting agenda. The Board heard the following reports:

Report of the Research, Development, and Dissemination Committee

Co-chairs Sharon Lynn Kagan and John Bruer reported on a work session the committee held on November 2, 1999, on the 1999 interim evaluation of the regional educational laboratories (carried out by Decision Information Resources, Inc.) and on recommendations derived from that session. The recommendations as amended and passed by the Board by unanimous vote are:

1. Future lab evaluations should include individual lab evaluations with substance, as well as cross-site analysis.
2. While the final evaluation of the labs would be summative, evaluations up to the interim would be formative in nature.
3. There should be established a committee of visitors for each of the labs, which would be involved in all aspects of the lab over time. Such a panel or standing committee would allow representation from all important groups, including researchers, classroom professionals, parents, and specialists in certain areas of lab work. Such a group would be familiar with the ongoing work of the lab and would be conversant and comfortable with any changes of direction which might occur. The peer reviewers who undertook this last evaluation were not sure they knew enough about the labs. With a board of visitors familiar from the beginning with the initial proposal, and with continuing site visits, the need for extensive and exhaustive background reading prior to the evaluation could be eliminated. Higher costs would be involved, but OERI staff indicated that additional funds could be found, given the amount of investment that the labs represent. It would be desirable, in the interest of objectivity, a wider perspective, and a sharpened critical viewpoint for individuals to serve on the committee of visitors for more than one lab.
4. Some of the details in the standards about material to be read by the reviewers might be replaced with OERI staff recommendations to the panels.
5. The evaluation should incorporate data on student outcomes.

Committee and ORAD staff members Robert Stonehill and Carol Chelemer reviewed an options paper of aspects of plans for the request for proposals for the upcoming recompetition of contracts of the regional educational laboratories.

Report of the Standards Committee

The session was chaired by Alba Ortiz, co-chair of the committee. Glenda Lappan, committee co-chair, recused herself from this discussion. William Morrill of Mathtech, Inc., who has been commissioned by the Board to study the application of standards for the designation of exemplary and promising programs, briefed the Board on the parameters of the study and on the first meeting of the panel (on December 3) that was convened to advise and provide guidance for it. Three meetings of this panel are envisioned.

Closed Session

The Board met in closed session from 3-5 p.m. under the authority of Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act [P.L. 92-463]; 5 U.S.C. Appendix D and under exemptions 4 and 9(b) of Section 552b of Title 5 U.S.C.

---

This page last modified -- August 18, 2000 (tca)