![[Table of Contents]](/icons/up.gif){kind=icon}
Arguments for the state's education reforms often refer to the need to prepare Vermonters for different sorts of jobs. Jobs in the textile mills have long since moved south. The various land-based industries (marble quarrying, dairy farming, logging) offer little hope for economic growth. Tourism continues as a major economic base, but is sensitive to general economic conditions. Much is made of the possibilities for high-tech industries, which could be attracted by a well-educated work force. Despite these economic problems, the median household income of Vermont families is around the national average, and average education revenue per student is more than 20 percent above the national average. Funding for K-12 education has increased dramatically in Vermont over the past 15 years. Constant-dollar, per-pupil expenditures increased by about 50 percent in the decade between 1981 and 1991, then leveled off. Wide variations in spending across the 60 supervisory unions, however, is an extremely salient political issue, capturing most of the legislature's discussions of education.
Results orientation. A "results" orientation is evident in the policies established by the VDE. The Chief State School Officer (CSSO) emphasizes the use of Total Quality Management (TQM) principles as a guide for the department's activities. The expectation is that the results of education should be measured, and the results used as a basis for guiding operation. The CSSO first established an assessment program, in which the results of assessment are easy to understand and authentically represent overall goals, and a general statement of the goals of Vermont's education, published as the Common Core of Learning (CCL). The assessment program was authentically based, which emphasized the importance placed on the results of education; and produces an output that allows teachers and the public to consider whether these are the results that are desired. The emphasis on results has also manifested itself in the revision of the teacher certification policies and program approval. The old system emphasized process criteria, while the new system emphasizes the results that the person or the program achieved. Teacher education program approval now relies heavily on examination of portfolios compiled by students in the program, and the results of the program, rather than the process of accumulating experiences.
Consistent with this element of the theory of change, the VDE has reorganized in order to concentrate their efforts on promoting reform. They are attempting to increase effectiveness by increasing employees' skill levels. Facilitating reform is now the VDE's priority, and they try get out of doing things that do not support reform, even when that means losing some of their capacity in other areas.
As part of their effort to be results oriented, the VDE devotes a significant portion of time to describing the vision of reform. The CSSO and his team leaders travel extensively within the state speaking with groups and reminding them of the general orientation presented in the Common Core. They also communicate the importance of having the individual elements of reform work together, and hope that this will increase the number of people working on the reform effort.
State Policies as Consistent, General Guidelines. The VDE believes that change must be promoted by advocacy of a general direction for change, not by insisting on a specific curriculum or instructional approach. State policies need to allow latitude for local adaptation if change is to occur. In the area of curriculum, the frameworks are seen as a bridge between the national standards, the Common Core and what is going on at the local level. The state's activities are intended to guide local action while keeping efforts across the state moving in the same general direction. The issue of "alignment" is seen as critical, as change efforts should be aimed at achieving a common goal. The department needs to manage change so that competition among the efforts will not dilute the impact, but will all fit together.
Since a results orientation is of little value without some criteria by which to evaluate the results, the VDE sees one of its key roles as orchestrating the development of Vermont's educational standards and of the assessments tied to those standards. The importance of the Common Core and the frameworks is that they will provide information to the districts. The expectations will be clear and useful, the emphasis will be on the outcomes and not the process of reaching the outcomes. The role of the VDE will be to provide materials to facilitate the reaching of these goals.
Public Support. Vermont's theory of change also includes an emphasis on public support. Because education reform involves values and fiscal resources, the public must be engaged and involved in the process. The public also must be made aware of the seriousness of the problems facing education on the state. One member of the VDE felt that educators were reluctant to bring these problems to the public because they were then being blamed for the problems.
The strength of the public has been evident in the process of Vermont's reform effort so far: in shaping goals, reinventing schools for high performance, and defining the common core of learning. The VDE envisions public support as a force that can be used to pressure schools to perform at higher levels. The VDE is considering a school approval process that would call for rating schools. If the school didn't meet standards, it would be declared bankrupt. Some in the VDE believe that such a rating system would pressure districts to become more involved in professional development and capacity building.
The VDE uses a combination of public meetings and mass media to keep the need for change and the progress toward broadly accepted goals in the public eye. Broadly distributed publications are another technique used to engage the public. Each year the VDE puts together a report on "The Condition of Education," filled with graphs and tables, many of which are explicitly linked to the states goals for education. The VDE has also prepared inserts for the major newspapers. The VDE views this outreach as crucial, since reform efforts depend on public financial support or support for giving teachers time out of the classroom. The public must be engaged and feel that they are the ones calling for the changes.
Time and Support. The staff in the Vermont Department of Education stress that lasting, significant change requires time and support. Individuals at the school level do not have time for the reforms in mathematics and writing. They need time and additional support. At the district level and at the VDE, similar problems exist. Additional financial resources and encouragement from citizens helps, but even with such support, change takes time. Time is needed for professional development, to work on curriculum, to work with students, and to talk to other teachers, parents and community members. Often legislators and the public do not appreciate this need for sufficient time to develop and implement reform, and are impatient for change.
Time is also needed to build public understanding and support for the reform. The Common Core took 2.5 years to develop, a process which helped to build a general feeling of ownership among the participants. While it could have been written much more quickly by the VDE, there would not be the same broad based dedication that was realized as a result of the investment of time.
Assessment. Vermont has a relatively short history of state-wide assessment. Traditional multiple choice tests have been pushed aside for a performance based test, which the State Board of Education viewed as a means for improving instruction as well as accountability. The SBE gave the VDE five years to develop the program, but the VDE feels a strong press for accountability to the legislature and the school board after only three years.
In 1993-94, the assessment was carried out in mathematics and writing in grades 4 and 8. Each student puts work into a portfolio, which is scored by the classroom teacher using criteria established at the state level. A state-wide team then scores a selected group of the portfolios. The portfolio system has been described as a cutting edge attempt to develop an assessment system that is more in line with national curriculum reforms, on the other hand a series by RAND have documented the difficulties in achieving reliable scoring at the state level.
Teacher Education and Certification. In 1989 the State Board of Education created a State Professional Standards Board to set policy for teacher certification and relicensure, and for teacher education and program approval. A majority of the Standards Board members are teachers, with the remaining members representing higher education and other interested groups. The major recent changes in teacher education program approval are a shift to portfolio-based program review and the addition of a requirement that teachers complete a disciplinary major as part of their teacher education program.
The new process for program approval is "results oriented" and based on portfolio review. Attention is paid to what students can do once they leave the program, rather than the fact that the program has been completed. The SBE has specified five general areas in which teachers must be prepared, but has not yet eliminated the old competency requirements. By 1995, individual teacher education students will have to prepare a portfolio for themselves, which will document how they have achieved the results expected by their program. The requirement that teachers have an academic major was legislated after the idea of requiring a master's degree was determined to be too expensive. There is some criticism from higher education that the requirement is for a thirty credit "major" in a subject field, (small m), rather than the completion of a traditional discipline-oriented "Major," such as English. Some groups are now working on the issue of interdisciplinary majors, which would be more in sync with the Common Core emphasis on curricular integration.
For teacher relicensure, the State Standards Board established a system in which teacher-majority local standards boards have been set up, to make relicensing decisions for teachers on a seven year cycle. The teacher-created, seven year plans must be approved by the local Board, and must include a plan and a portfolio of how the teacher proposes to improve his instruction during the cycle. Once approved, the plan is used when considering annual requests for professional development support such as tuition reimbursement or conference attendance support.
Accountability and Approval. There are presently 151 school approval standards, oriented towards resources and processes, rather than results. During the 1993-94 year members of the VDE were working on revising the school approval standards so that they would be more closely aligned with the state commitment to results as described in the Common Core.
Professional Development. The VDE does not use professional development as a formal strategy in their reform effort. The theory of state policies being used as general, consistent guidelines seems to be in force here. Members of the VDE do acknowledge, however, that time is needed for additional professional development.
Professional development at the state level results as a consequence of the other individual components of systemic reform. For example, the CSSO sees building partnerships as a form of professional development; it is an indirect way of getting teachers involved with developing the agenda. The VDE uses training for other aspects of their reform effort, like the state assessment, as opportunities for professional development. To inform teachers about the assessment process and to train them in the scoring rubrics, inservice sessions were held. For part of the teacher relicensure requirements, every teacher will have to put together a plan for what they would like to do to improve their instruction over the next seven years. These plans would be used when evaluating requests for support for professional development. During the 1993-94 year the state legislature also considered bills that would have added professional development days to the school year, tied to reform efforts. Teachers would have received some additional pay for these days, as many as 20 in some proposals, but not the same rate as their regular pay. None of the bills were enacted.
The VDE is also building partnerships with other education groups in the state, encouraging them to view the reform of education as their own, and not something dictated by the VDE. Groups are able to identify reform needs and to act in those areas. The VDE facilitates this type of participation by assisting with grant writing, providing seed money for projects, like teacher networks, and by publicizing some of the efforts to reform Vermont schools. Some activities have also been oriented at building partnerships with higher education. A commission of the college presidents was established to revise the approaches for approving programs for teacher education. The VDE is also interested in having higher education take a more active role in research and technical assistance linked to state reforms.
-###-
[Chapter 4: Challenges to Implementing Systemic Reform]