The Illinois School Board Journal May/June 2012

M A Y / J U N E 2 0 1 2 Vol. 80, No. 3

READING • WRITING • ARITHMETIC • BEANS • BALLS • BUSES

This issue, which focuses on

math, is the third in our year-

long series to examine the three Rs

and the three Bs of board work. For

those of us who work with words, the

Rs of reading and writing come eas-

ily. And then there is math …

What’s apparent from these first

three cover stories is that students

are being asked to achieve at high-

er levels than ever before. As a con-

sequence, school boards that do not

ask questions about the rigor of their

curriculum may be dooming their

students to problems for a lifetime.

The Center for Public Education

(CPE) released a report in March 2012

that asked the following question: Is

the high school curriculum tough

enough? The report focuses on strate-

gies that are “capable of toughen-

ing up the high school curriculum.”

One of the biggest challenges

comes from defining “rigor.” As Glenn

“Max” McGee, current president of

the Illinois Mathematics and Science

Academy in Aurora, says in this issue’s

cover story: “‘Algebra I’ looks differ-

ent in different parts of the state.”

And what one district may define

as “rigorous” is not what passes for

rigor in another, whether it’s with Illi-

nois State Learning Standards or

Common Core State Standards.

Even more troubling in the CPE

report, which is based on informa-

tion from the U.S. Department of Edu-

cation’s Office for Civil Rights, is that

3,000 high schools serving nearly

500,000 students do not offer any

classes in Algebra II, a key subject on

the SAT and for other indicators of

college readiness. Four times that

many students never have access to

a calculus class in high school, accord-

ing to the report.

In his 1999 study “Answers in

the Toolbox: Academic Intensity,

Attendance Patterns and Bache-

lor’s Degree Attainment” and again

in a 2006 study “The Toolbox Revis-

ited: Paths to Degree Completion

From High School Through College,”

Clifford Adelman found that “taking

a math course beyond the level of

Algebra II (such as trigonometry or

pre-calculus) doubled the odds that

a student entering college would com-

plete a bachelor’s degree.”

However, a study from the Nation-

al Center for Education Statistics

completed in 2007 found that only

one-third of students from disad-

vantaged families take math beyond

Algebra II, compared with 72 percent

of affluent students. Even more trou-

bling is that those who do have access

to those courses may not be getting

the same rigor. According to the Nation-

al Center for Educational Account-

ability, even though certain groups

of Texas students had Algebra II and

geometry on their high school tran-

scripts, more than two-thirds of African

American students and 60 percent

of low-income students failed to pass

their state math assessments that

only cover Algebra I concepts.

The CPE report offered six prac-

tical suggestions for school board

members who wish to ensure that

district students are presented class-

es with the correct rigor to achieve

their lifetime goals:

Access: Address the issues of

class offerings first, particularly to

note whether the district offers Alge-

bra II.

Equity: Exposure to higher lev-

el courses can translate into long-

term gains for minority and low income

students. Whatever the strategy,

increasing rigor in classes should be

across the board and available to

all students.

Funding: Look to state and fed-

eral sources to help fund initiatives

like the AP Incentive Program or dual

enrollment opportunities with local

community colleges and universities.

Advocacy: Monitor trends as the

Common Core State Standards are

being implemented or provide direct

input about development of the new

assessments.

K-12/college links: Ask to see

data on how the district’s gradu-

ates perform in their first year of col-

lege to determine if the district’s

curriculum is providing the proper

preparation.

Data: Cooperate with national

efforts to collect data on programs

such as Advanced Placement, Inter-

national Baccalaureate, dual enroll-

ment and early college programs to

help identify if resources are being

well-spent for the results.

“No matter the precise defini-

tion, the academic rigor of a student’s

high school coursework has a long-

lasting impact on future careers and

earnings,” the CPE report stated. By

asking the right questions, like those

above and those included with this

issue’s cover story on math, board

members have the opportunity and

the responsibility to help ensure that

students are prepared for their lives

beyond high school.

Vol. 80, No. 3

M A Y / J U N H E 2 0 1 2

ILLINOIS SCHOOL BOARD JOURNAL(ISSN-0019-221X) is published every other month by the Illinois Associationof School Boards, 2921 Baker Drive, Springfield, Illinois 62703-5929, telephone217/528-9688. The IASB regional officeis located at One Imperial Place, 1 East22nd Street, Lombard, Illinois 60148-6120, telephone 630/629-3776.

The JOURNAL is supported by the duesof school boards holding active member-ship in the Illinois Association of SchoolBoards. Copies are mailed to all schoolboard members and the superintendentin each IASB member school district.

Non-member subscription rate: Domes-tic $18.00 per year. Foreign (includingCanada and Mexico) $21.00 per year.

PUBLICATION POLICYIASB believes that the domestic processfunctions best through frank and opendiscussion. Material published in the JOUR-NAL, therefore, often presents divergentand controversial points of view which donot necessarily represent the views orpolicies of IASB.

James Russell, Associate Executive Director

Linda Dawson, EditorGary Adkins, Contributing EditorDiane M. Cape, Design and

Production ManagerDana Heckrodt, Advertising Manager

T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S

Cover by Corbin Design, PetersburgJuly/August First B: Beans (Finance)September/October Second B: Balls (Extracurriculars)

COVER STORY

12 Figuring out a way to make math ‘cool’Those who love math keep looking for ways to keep math achievement from dipping once many students reach middle school.

Linda Dawson

14 Sidebar: Questions for board members to ask about math instruction15 Sidebar: Recognizing mathematics proficiency

FEATURE STORIES

4 | A parting viewIASB heads forward with a clear visionIASB’s mission will remain the same even as the executive director changes in July.

Michael D. Johnson

8 | Speaking of board membersHow responsibilities relate to graduation ceremoniesThe role of a board member has at least five similarities with being a graduation speaker.

Linda Dawson

21 | Academic game changerImplementing Common Core State Standards in IllinoisThe first in a four-part series detailing what board members should know about the neweducational standards.

Donna McCaw, Stuart Yager, Carol Webb and Rene Noppe

23 Sidebar: FAQs about the Common Core State Standards

24 | After nearly a year What we’ve learned, how to deal with SB7 evaluation mandatesThe Illinois Education Reform Act means board members will need to be more familiarwith teacher evaluations.

David J. Braun

26 Sidebar: RIF/evaluation checklist

30 | Seven tips toward making evaluations more effectiveThese practices can assist in the transition to new evaluation systems.

Adam Cobb

32 | Typical costs can help boards budgetKnowing how much it will cost can help boards budget for professional development.

Linda Dawson

36 | IASB helps to answer governance questionsNational readership gets good advice from IASB staff members.

Angie Peifer and John J. Cassel

T O P I C S F O R U P C O M I N G I S S U E S

REGULAR FEATURES

Boiler Room. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2Practical PR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35Milestones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40Ask the staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inside back cover

2 THE ILLINOIS SCHOOL BOARD JOURNAL / MAY-JUNE 2012

Here at Eastside, we’re all kin-

da proud of our eighth-grade

boys’ basketball team. It’s not ’cause

they’re the best team in the league

… far from it. It’s really ’cause our

hoopsters really put their heart and

soul into the game.

Last winter, however, Mr. Keck

began to notice some problems con-

nected with our home games. So, he

had a meeting after school with all the

adults who are in any way connected

to these Friday night events … and I

mean everybody. I generally work late

when we have a home game, just to

help the night shift clean up the gym,

so I was at the meeting, too.

Mr. Keck began by addressing

the concession stand volunteers.

“I understand that we had more

than 100 hot dogs left over from the

last game. That’s very wasteful. How

come there were so many?”

“That’s because we expected a

whole bunch of folks to show up, but

they didn’t,” replied Mrs. Gustafson.

“When we expect a whole bunch of

folks, we precook the hot dogs and

keep them in the warmer oven so

we’ll be ready for the mad rush about

half-way through the game. It turned

out, though, that quite a few attend-

ed the game, but not a whole bunch.”

“What happened to the leftover

hot dogs?” Keck asked.

“Well, the ladies and I sold quite

a few after the game by marking them

down to 50 cents. When we figured

everybody bought as many as they

were going to, we gave a whole bunch

away to the players and the cheer-

leaders and their parents.”

“Wait a minute,” interjected Keck.

“How many, exactly, is a whole

bunch?”

“More than quite a few,” replied

Mrs. Gustafson.

Keck now turned his attention

to the volunteer ticket sellers.

“How many tickets did you peo-

ple sell that night?”

“I agree with Helen … quite a few

… not a whole bunch,” replied Mar-

garet Bookman.

“You mean you don’t have an

accurate count?”

“Don’t you remember, Mr. Keck?

We bought those cut-rate tickets that

don’t have sequential numbers. And

there’s no time, believe me, to keep

tabs when you’ve got tons of people

standing in line!”

“Tons of people? What did you

do? Weigh them?”

“You know what I mean, Mr. Keck

… TONS of people.”

“Uh-huh.”

Coach Parker now entered the

conversation …

“I can shed some light on this,

Mr. Keck. We tend to have the largest

turnout when the teams are evenly

matched. Then, all the fans know it

will be an exciting game, with a nar-

row point spread. When we’re ranked

better than another school’s team …

like Roberts Junior High, for exam-

ple … the fan turn out is low ’cause

everybody knows what the result will

be and nobody likes watching a team

that’s not so hot get humiliated ... like

last time, when we beat Roberts by

62 points.”

Gus, the custodi-

an at Eastside

Grammar, is the

creation of

Richard W.

Smelter, a retired

school principal,

now a Chicago-

based college

instructor and

author.

Impractical estimationslead to math confusion

by “Gus”

B O I L E R R O O M

“Wait a minute,”

interjected Keck.

“How many, exactly,

is a whole bunch?”

“More than quite

a few,” replied

Mrs. Gustafson.

PresidentCarolyne Brooks

Vice PresidentKaren Fisher

ImmediatePast PresidentJoseph Alesandrini

IASB is a voluntary association of local boards ofeducation and is not affiliated with any branch ofgovernment.

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Abe LincolnRoger Edgecombe

BlackhawkJackie Mickley

Central Illinois ValleyThomas Neeley

Cook NorthPhil Pritzker

Cook SouthTom Cunningham

Cook WestJoanne Zendol

Corn BeltMark Harms

DuPageRosemary Swanson

EgyptianJohn Metzger

IlliniMichelle Skinlo

KaskaskiaLinda Eades

KishwaukeeMary Stith

Lake CountyJoanne Osmond

NorthwestBen Andersen

ShawneeRoger Pfister

SouthwesternJohn Coers

Starved RockSimon Kampwerth Jr.

Three Rivers / TreasurerDale Hansen

Two RiversDavid Barton

Wabash ValleyTim Blair

WesternSue McCance

Chicago BoardJesse Ruiz

Services AssociatesSteve Larson

MAY-JUNE 2012 / THE ILLINOIS SCHOOL BOARD JOURNAL 3

“What about that team from

Carlisle?” asked Keck.

“Same kinda thing, Mr. Keck …

small turnout … this time ’cause the

fans know we haven’t got a prayer.

Carlisle’s the top-ranked team in the

county. Eastside fans feel even more

uncomfortable about seeing our boys

get humiliated. Now, when the teams

are evenly matched, we get a humun-

go turnout, like we did two games ago.”

“How many is humungo?” asked

Keck.

“Well, that’s way more than a

whole bunch,” the coach replied.

“So, let me see if I have this right.

Humungo is way more than a whole

bunch, but a whole bunch is way

more than quite a few.”

“Now you’ve got it, Mr. Keck!”

exclaimed Mrs. Gustafson.

“Well, what’s beneath those terms,

Ethel?”

“Well, just under quite a few is

sorta average, under that is not so

many, and under that is bummer.”

“Wow … new math,” Keck mum-

bled under his breath.

“What did you say, Mr. Keck?”

“Never mind, Ethel.”

The meeting adjourned, and I

walked Mr. Keck back to his office.

He looked kinda confused.

“Say, Gus,” he began. “I heard

some parents had their cars ticket-

ed by the police while they were in

the school watching a game a few

weeks ago.”

“Yeah,” I responded. “That was

one of those evenly matched games

Coach was talking about. The lot was

overflowing, so quite a lot of parents

parked their cars in illegal parking

places. Not really a whole bunch …

but a ton of them.”

“Don’t start with me, Gus.”

“Oh, sorry. Say, boss … nice

meeting.”

“Do you think we learned any-

thing, Gus? I mean, other than peo-

ple seem to have thrown accurate

mathematics out the window?”

“Yeah, Mr. Keck! Humungo!”

“Wow! This was not anticipated.”


Editor’s note: In August 2000,

Michael D. Johnson became

just the fifth full-time executive direc-

tor in the 98-year history of the Illi-

nois Association of School Boards.

He retired from that role in May 2007

and returned in July 2007 as exec-

utive director emeritus to focus on

the transition to a new executive and

to help with fundraising for the Asso-

ciation. He will relinquish that role

and end 12 years of service with IASB

in June 2012.

This is the fifth of five articles

Johnson will write for The Jour-

nal, outlining what he and the Asso-

ciation have done and where he

believes both are heading. In this

issue, Johnson reviews the transi-

tion of executive directors and his

personal plans.

What does one do for an encore

to a career in public education that

began in 1973 and is close to ending

39 years later?

I may be older and maybe a bit

slower, but I have definite plans. Those

include spending more time with fam-

ily, especially our two grandchildren

(and another on the way), and more

time on fundraising and scholarship

activities for Ronald McDonald House

Charities.

But before I go, I would like to

review where we’ve been in my 12-

year tenure as executive director and

executive director emeritus of the

Illinois Association of School Boards,

and where I think IASB and public

education is heading.

As of July 1, the Association will

have a new executive director. But

the mission will remain the same:

excellence in local school governance

in support of quality public educa-

tion. I know that your new executive

director — Roger Eddy — will be com-

mitted to serving the Association and

its members with that mission firm-

ly in place.

Roger and I have spent the past

two months helping him to become

better acquainted with IASB board

of directors, staff, members, partners

and other associations. It’s been a

good opportunity for Roger to devel-

op new relationships and to re-affirm

those that I can pass on to him.

Fortunately, Roger’s own expe-

rience as a superintendent and state

lawmaker gives him a tremendous

advantage; he knows how things

get done and who to go to. And he

knows the issues, many of which don’t

change much over the years.

But there are some challenges

on the horizon that the Associa-

tion and local school boards face that

increase the stakes: education reform,

teacher and administrator perfor-

mance evaluation, pension reform,

mandatory training, calls for con-

solidation, and greater financial pres-

sures as the state continues to

withdraw from its commitment to

adequately support public educa-

tion.

These challenges will be demand-

ing. There will be hardships and hur-

dles. Even the most prudent districts

and those with the greatest revenue

Michael D. John-

son is executive

director emeritus

of the Illinois

Association of

School Boards.

This is part five of

a five-part series.

F E A T U R E A R T I C L E

A parting view …IASB heads forwardwith a clear mission

by Michael D. Johnson

One of the things

that makes IASB so

successful and its

programs so

valuable is that

we try very hard

to anticipate

member needs.


sources will be pressed. IASB will feel

the same pressures; yet it will be

ready to serve as more districts turn

to the Association for more services

to help them contend with these

issues.

One of the things that makes

IASB so successful and its programs

so valuable is that we try very hard

to anticipate member needs.

The latest example is our new

partnership with Performance Mat-

ters. This K-12 data management and

assessment service is designed to

merge leading and lagging indicators

as well as student information sys-

tems, so that teaching staff and admin-

istrators can quickly and accurately

analyze student performance data

against state standards in order to

differentiate instruction and meet

student learning needs.

New education reform measures

will impose more accountability

requirements on school boards and

school districts. Do districts know

that they need this service or some-

thing like it? Maybe not yet. But we

will be ready when they do.

Services like this did not exist

or were not needed when I became

executive director in August 2000.

A lot has happened since — from No

Child Left Behind to Senate Bill 7.

Our training has evolved too, from

a regional delivery model to one that

emphasizes local, in-district train-

ing, working with whole boards and

not just on individual board mem-

ber skills.

One reason we have been able

to keep up with these new demands

is the makeup of the IASB staff.

Our professional and support

staff have a diverse and broad back-

ground. We have educators, princi-

pals, superintendents, attorneys,

board members and practitioners

from other fields, who bring their

experience and expertise to the table.

In fact, IASB staff is viewed as a nation-

al leader, and has worked extensive-

ly with 32 other state associations

and the National School Boards Asso-

ciation on many projects and initia-

tives.

The size of the Association staff

has nearly doubled in the past 12

years, and I am very proud of the

people and programs we have put

STAFFOFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORMichael L. Bartlett, Deputy Executive Director

Meetings ManagementPatricia Culler, Assistant to the Executive DirectorSandy Boston, Assistant Director

Office of General CounselMelinda Selbee, General CounselKimberly Small, Assistant General Counsel

Executive SearchesDonna Johnson, DirectorDoug Blair, ConsultantDawn Miller, ConsultantThomas Leahy, Consultant

ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICESJennifer Feld, Associate ExecutiveDirector/Chief Financial Officer

Production ServicesDiane M. Cape, Senior Director

ADVOCACY/GOVERNMENTAL RELATIONSBenjamin S. Schwarm, Associate Executive DirectorDeanna L. Sullivan, DirectorSusan Hilton, Director

AdvocacyCynthia Woods, Director

BOARD DEVELOPMENT/TARGETING ACHIEVEMENT THROUGH GOVERNANCEAngie Peifer, Associate Executive Director

Board DevelopmentSandra Kwasa, DirectorNesa Brauer, Consultant

Targeting Achievement through GovernanceDebra Walden, ConsultantSteve Clark, Consultant

COMMUNICATIONSJames Russell, Associate Executive DirectorGary W. Adkins, Director/EditorialLinda Dawson, Director/EditorialJennifer Nelson, Director, Information ServicesGerald R. Glaub, Consultant

FIELD SERVICES/POLICY SERVICESCathy A. Talbert, Associate Executive Director

Field ServicesLarry Dirks, DirectorDean Langdon, DirectorPatrick Rice, DirectorJeff Cohn, DirectorBarbara B. Toney, DirectorLaurel DiPrima, Director

Policy ServicesAnna Lovern, DirectorNancy Bohl, ConsultantAndrea Dolgin, ConsultantJackie Griffith, ConsultantWayne Savageau, ConsultantBrian Zumpf, Consultant

IASB OFFICES

2921 Baker DriveSpringfield, Illinois 62703-5929217/528-9688 Fax 217/528-2831

One Imperial Place1 East 22nd Street, Suite 20Lombard, Illinois 60148-6120630/629-3776 Fax 630/629-3940

www.iasb.com


into place. I also hope that my role

as an entrepreneur has helped to

make the Association financially fit

to develop and deliver the services

our members want and need. With-

out money, good ideas just remain

dreams. I’ve always liked to dream

big.

I’ve reached the point where I’ve

become the unofficial historian for

our state school management asso-

ciations. By preserving that per-

spective, I believe it has helped to

keep the Association relevant in pub-

lic policy debate. We’ve always strived

to balance the political rhetoric with

practical hindsight and reliable facts

in order to influence outcomes with

minimal negative impact on local

school districts.

There are many people I should

thank for the freedom I enjoyed to

do the things I was able to do through

the Association: the IASB board of

directors and its leadership, my deputy

executive director (Mike Bartlett)

and administrative assistant (Carla

Bolt), our administrative team and

our staff.

And most importantly, I need

to thank my family. I missed events

and people whenever I was away,

but I appreciate that the board always

gave me the option to put family

first whenever the occasion required

it.

I look forward to my own retire-

ment and the chance to watch IASB

from the sidelines. It’s been a great

12 years. I know the Association is

heading toward its next century of

service — not with mission accom-

plished, but with mission clearly

defined.

Best wishes to IASB, Roger and

to all of you.

SHAPEUP(Your policy

manual, that is)

Is your policy manual tiredand out of shape?

No matter what shape andcondition the manual is in,Policy Services can help.

It’s time to consider a

Policy ManualCustomization

with IASB.An IASB policy consultant will work with your district to develop a new and

up-to-date local school board policy manual.

Individual policies will be

✓ clear and concise.✓ legally referenced.✓ cross-referenced to related policies.✓ identified with adoption dates.

In addition, you will receive a 6-month com-plimentary PRESS Plus Service when yournew manual is adopted to keep it current.

If your district has completed a Policy Manual Customization with a representative from IASB within the past 5 years, you

may be eligible for a Streamlined Policy Manual Customization. Thisservice provides all the benefits of a full customization with a streamlinedprocess for efficient use of school board staff and resources.

NEW

Anna LovernPhone: 217-528-9688,

ext. 1125Email: [email protected]

Brian ZumpfPhone: 630-629-3776,

ext. 1214Email: [email protected]

For more information:



Over the course of the next few

weeks, hundreds of thousands

of people will head to auditoriums,

gymnasiums and outdoor arenas to

attend graduation ceremonies for

high school and college students. One

of the event’s staples is usually a grad-

uation speaker.

You may not have thought of it

like this before, but in a number of

ways, board members are like speak-

ers at graduation ceremonies. Here

are the similarities:

It’s an honor

Colleges often invite “big name”

speakers to talk

about the future

that awaits grad-

uates. Many

school districts

choose members

of the graduating

class to do the

honors. People

consider it an

honor to be cho-

sen to speak

before such a

gathering.

No matter

whether you’re a

“well known”

name or just one

in your “class” of

community resi-

dents, it’s also an

honor to be elect-

ed to a school

board. It makes

you one of a select few.

In Illinois, just more than 6,000

residents can say they are current

school board members. That may

sound like a lot, but when you con-

sider Illinois has a population of

12,830,632, according to the 2010

U.S. Census, school board members

make up less than one-half of 1 per-

cent on any given day.

That number also pales in com-

parison with the Illinois school pop-

ulation, which is about 18 percent of

all residents, according to the most

recent census.

A position of responsibility

A graduation speaker is only one

person, and yet the speaker sits on

stage as a part of a small group with

certain responsibilities. The speak-

er is responsible for the remarks, but

someone else does the greeting, anoth-

er presents the class and yet anoth-

er may actually hand out diplomas.

Collectively, everyone functions to

make the ceremony run smoothly

and efficiently.

The same is true in your role

as a school board member. You are

just one of seven members of the com-

munity elected to your position on

Linda Dawson is

IASB director/

editorial services

and editor of The

Illinois School

Board Journal.

Speaking of board members …

How responsibilities relateto graduation ceremonies

by Linda Dawson


the “stage” of school governance.

Each board member has a role to play,

but you have no actual authority as

an individual to make decisions. It is

only as a collective board of seven,

working with your superintendent,

that you come to agreements and lead

the district.

Representative or trustee role

When speakers are selected for

graduation, especially if they are stu-

dents, those who make the selection

want someone who will represent the

graduating class well. They put their

trust in that speaker to make remarks

that are appropriate for the audience.

Many student speakers are

required to submit their remarks to

someone in authority before the cer-

emony. Straying very far from those

submitted remarks can result in sanc-

tions that usually are spelled out ahead

of time.

Voters elected you to be their

representative and be their “voice”

on the board. But they also invested

their trust in you. They trust you to

be fiscally responsible with tax dol-

lars. They trust you to make deci-

sions that are in the best interest of

their children.

A difference, although sometimes

subtle, exists between being a rep-

resentative and being a trustee. Rep-

resentative government implies that

the person serving listens to his or

her constituents and then makes deci-

sions based on what the majority of

those speaking have said. A trustee,

on the other hand, takes the welfare

of the entire group into considera-

tion before making a decision.

While you were elected in a rep-

resentative form of government,

sometimes you need to sit in trust

and make decisions that, while not

popular with some or even most of

the community, are essential for the

best interest of the district as a whole.

Consider the district that has an

older building that has outlived its

maintenance life. Repairs are cost-

ing more and more each year, but

the community has strong, nostal-

gic ties and wants to keep the build-

ing open.

A new building not only would

be more cost-effective but allow stu-

dents more opportunities for enriched

curriculum because of technology.

What do you do?

Your representative side might

want to hold out and keep that build-

ing open as long as possible, because

that’s what your constituents want.

But your trustee side would argue

that millions of tax dollars are being

thrown at a situation that will not

improve the basic problem (an old

building) and students are missing

out on new opportunities.

The decision will never be easy

or popular with everyone, but some-

times you’ll be called on to make those

tough decisions because you do sit

as a trustee for the district’s finances

and their children.

Just like students who stray from

the script, you may face sanctions at

the polls for voting your conscience.

But at least you can do so knowing

that you did your best for your dis-

trict … and that really was what you

were elected to do.

Balcony perspective

Sitting up on the stage, a grad-

uation speaker has a much different

view of the ceremony than the grad-

uates or the audience. The speaker

is close to the action, and yet not

always a part of it. The speaker comes

to the dais when called for, but main-

tains a distance from the rest of the

proceedings.

The same is true in your role

as a board member. You need to have

a different perspective, one that was

explained by Richard Broholm and

Douglas Johnson in A Balcony Per-

spective: Clarifying the Trustee Role.

Board members need to main-

tain their “balcony perspective” in

order to stay above the day-to-day

business of the district. As a board

member, you may set a policy regard-

ing student decorum during gradua-

tion, but you are not in charge of the

front-line discipline.

A balcony perspective, like sit-

ting on the stage at a graduation cer-

emony, allows you to observe the big

picture of how the district functions.

Board members need to maintain their “balcony perspective” in

order to stay above the day-to-day business of the district. As a

board member, you may set a policy regarding student decorum

during graduation, but you are not in charge of the front-line

discipline.


Just as the speaker is not the one to

go out into the sea of graduates to

confiscate the beach ball, you don’t

need to be involved in what goes on

“down on the floor,” other than to

observe and note whether the poli-

cies that you have put in place are

being carried out reasonably, effi-

ciently and effectively.

Opportunity and legacy

Graduation speakers are given

an opportunity to make their state-

ment and leave their mark on a par-

ticular occasion. Their speeches

usually convey hope for the future

and confidence in the new graduates

to go forth and live productive lives.

Some may utter phrases that stick

with graduates for years, just because

this was a special time and a spe-

cial moment.

Board members also have an

opportunity to leave their mark and

create a legacy for the district that

will endure.

According to IASB’s most recent

member survey, conducted in 2008,

59 percent of board member respon-

dents said they have achieved or made

progress toward the goals they had

when they were elected to the board.

When asked what they would

most like to accomplish, board mem-

bers were able to choose from:

• Improve achievement levels of all

students of the district

• Improve the way in which the school

board and superintendent operate

• Engage the community more effec-

tively in pursuing a vision for the

district

• Improve the district’s financial

condition

• Leave schools in the same good

condition as when I came on the

board

The top two responses were

improving achievement and engag-

ing the community.

You may have your own idea of

what you want your legacy to be, and

it may not be reflected in any of the

above choices. But whatever your

legacy, your time on this school board

is special — not only for you but for

your district.

No two graduation ceremonies

are ever the same. No two school

boards are ever the same either. Look

to your future on the board and gov-

ern as if you were the best gradua-

tion speaker ever to take the stage.

ciation (IPA) and the Illinois Associ-

ation of School Business Officials (Illi-

nois ASBO). IASB staff writes the

legislative report that then is dis-

tributed to school board members,

superintendents, business officials

and principals.

The report is sent out weekly,

via e-mail, and includes the latest

news from the Capitol regarding

school-related legislation. By read-

ing the legislative report, school board

members will have the information

necessary to determine when a call

to a legislator might be needed. Any-

one can receive the report simply by

sending an e-mail to bschwarm

@iasb.com and requesting it.

Here are a few tips in reaching

out to your local legislators:

• If you have not yet met your state

representative or senator, make a

call to the district office, introduce

yourself as a school board mem-

ber and offer to be a resource on

school-related legislation.

• When the legislators are home in

the district office, set up a meet-

ing with a couple of school board

members, the superintendent and

a principal to discuss education

matters.

• Since the legislator is not always

available in the district, especial-

ly during the legislative session,

get acquainted with the adminis-

trative assistant or legislative aide

in the district office. These key

staff people are valuable resources.

• Visit, call, e-mail or write a letter

to legislators on key legislation

relating to your school district. Get

to the point, use local data and stay

out of “attack mode.”

• Feel free to contact IASB legisla-

tive team members if you have a

question, comment or wish to relay

feedback from your legislators

Ask the staff continued from inside back cover

IASB Service Associates provide quality products and services for schools. Membership is by invitation only. A list of Service Associate firms is on the IASB website and in this Journal.

The best ofeverything for schools

S

IASB SERVICE

ASSOCIATES


C O V E R S T O R Y

Don Porzio has a collection of

Games magazines that he’s

collected for 18 years. He keeps them

as a ready resource when he needs a

new math challenge. As an instruc-

tor at the Illinois Mathematics and

Science Academy (IMSA) in Aurora,

he likes to use the puzzles with his

students … as well as with their par-

ents.

“On preview day, we have thou-

sands of people on campus,” Porzio

said. “Every day I start them off with

a puzzle.”

One of his favorites is this:

Move one and only one dig-

it in the following equation

to make it correct:

62 - 63 = 1

(I’ll give you time to pon-

der the question and reveal the

answer at the end of the article

— no fair peeking. In the mean-

time, let’s move on …)

In a recent independent study

commissioned by Raytheon Com-

pany, a leading U.S. Aerospace and

defense contractor, 70 percent of mid-

dle school students said they liked

math. In fact, they like it enough that

15 percent ranked it as their third

favorite subject in school, right behind

physical education (18 percent) and

art (16 percent).

The students surveyed also found

that 58 percent acknowledge that

math will be important to them in

their future, especially in the role it

will play for careers in technology.

So, why is it that math achieve-

ment posts a noticeable drop off

between fourth and eighth grades?

The National Assessment of Educa-

tional Progress (NAEP) rates students

tested as “basic,” “proficient” and

“advanced.” In 2009, according to

the U.S. Department of Education,

20 percent of fourth graders scored

below the “basic” math level, but 27

percent of eighth graders scored below

“basic.”

According to Illinois Standard

Achievement Test results from 2011,

statewide percentages were not as

dire: just 11 percent of fourth-graders

Linda Dawson is

IASB director/

editorial services

and editor of The

Illinois School

Board Journal.

Figuring out a wayto make math ‘cool’

by Linda Dawson


failed to score in the “meets” or

“exceeds” categories in math, while

13 percent scored below “meets”

or “exceeds” in eighth-grade math.

The failure of some students to

increase math achievement and to

grasp the importance that math may

play in careers other than technolo-

gy can be disheartening for instruc-

tors like Porzio, even though he sees

the best of the best in his classes.

Many everyday jobs require math

skills, from running a cash register

and counting out change to tap-

ping numbers into a calculator to

come up with an estimate of how

much new windows will cost for an

entire house. Yes, these jobs allow

the use of technology, but somewhere

along the line, that person had to

learn the functions behind the tech-

nology in order to be able to make

sense of the numbers.

High achievers

IMSA, where Porzio has taught

for the past 14 years, attracts top-

notch students who want to be chal-

lenged, especially in their math and

science classes. The residential-style

high school features a well-rounded,

typical high school curriculum but

the emphasis is on rigorous study and

high student achievement. Almost

all IMSA graduates go on to college,

many to Ivy League and selective uni-

versities.

Even though there is no mini-

mum grade point average or SAT score

(needed for admission), the GPA aver-

age for incoming students (10th-

graders) was 3.9/4.0 for the class of

2013. Their SAT scores averaged 607

on critical reading and 679 on math,

out of a possible 800 points for each

category.

Of the 600 to 950 students who

apply each year as eighth- or ninth-

graders, only 230 to 250 are accept-

ed as entering 10th-grade students

for the following year. And even then,

maybe 40 or 50 students a year require

a “bridge program” to address acad-

emic deficiencies in their background,

according to Glenn W. “Max” McGee,

IMSA president.

“We do well because the kids who

come here had excellent teachers at

the local level,” McGee said. “We’d

like all teachers to be that good.”

Unfortunately, Algebra I looks

different in different parts of the state,

and the newly adopted Common Core

State Standards (CCSS) won’t change

that, he said.

McGee, who served as Illinois

state superintendent of schools from

January 1999 to December 2001,

came to IMSA five years ago. He also

serves on the group developing assess-

ments for the CCSS that will be used

for school year 2014-15 testing in Illi-

nois.

Their biggest challenge is com-

ing up with assessments that will

be easy to score but at the same time

require students “to produce rather

than circle and solve.”

“There are lots of wrong ways to

get a right answer,” Porzio said. “The

answer is not enough. Show me your

thinking.

“With assessments, we’re not

talking about just designing good ques-

tions. The difficulty comes in find-

ing a way to look at extended response

questions to score with a machine,”

he added.

Porzio knows all the mistakes

that students can make trying to get

to a right answer. He’s also aware that

with multiple choice questions,

whether in class or on standardized

tests, you have to have a legitimate

distractor for students who might just

be guessing at the answers.

Leading up to CCSS

From his tenure in math educa-

tion, Porzio can recall a number of

different periods in math education

now leading up to the switch to Com-

mon Core standards.

“The ‘new math’ in the 1960s

was overrun by college and acade-

mia and was very theoretical,” he

said. In the late 1980s, the first stan-

dards were developed by the Nation-

al Council of Teachers of Mathematics

(NCTM), “and that was when we had

‘fuzzy math,’ where it seemed like

Many everyday jobs require math skills, from running a cash regis-

ter and counting out change to tapping numbers into a calculator to

come up with an estimate of how much new windows will cost for

an entire house. Yes, these jobs allow the use of technology, but some-

where along the line, that person had to learn the functions behind

the technology in order to be able to make sense of the numbers.


the answers didn’t matter.”

In A Winning Formula for Math-

ematics Instruction: Converting

Research into Results, Judith Jacobs

describes the differences between

“traditional” and “standards-based”

math. After a career in mathematics

education professional development,

Jacobs retired in 2008 from a posi-

tion as math professor at California

State Polytechnic University in

Pomona.

She states that traditional math

instruction has three components:

• Checking homework

• A teaching segment

• Practice by students on solving

textbook problems

The first, she says, “can take half

the time allotted” for the lesson. The

second, while constituting the direct

teaching portion of the class time,

usually places the emphasis “on the

teacher’s demonstration of how to

solve problems of a particular type.”

The third element of practice is self-

explanatory, and then there is the

homework that will be turned in the

following day and the cycle begins

again.

Other researchers, including Bri-

an Rowan, Delena M. Harrison and

Andrew Hayes in their 2004 article

“Using instructional logs to study

mathematics teaching in the early

grades,” call this the “explain, prac-

tice, memorize” approach. Jacobs

quoted the National Research Coun-

cil as calling it “mindless mimicry

mathematics” in 1989.

Could this be why some students

lose their “love” for math after the

elementary grades? These students

see little connection to their every-

day lives, even though many of those

early story problems involve every-

day items, like apples and oranges

and how far it is to the store.

Standards-based math programs,

however, “start from a clearly defined

set of mathematics objectives usual-

ly organized by grade level …,” Jacobs

states. Her list of standards-based

program characteristics, drawn from

research, include:

• Use good questioning to prod learn-

ing without telling students how

to do the problems or providing

answers;

• Have both teacher demonstration

and guided opportunities for

practice;

• Use challenging, interesting and

complex questions and tasks that

draw on prior knowledge;

• Promote student reflection on their

mathematical experiences to explain

their reasoning; and

• Create a positive classroom envi-

ronment toward mathematics and

students’ ability to do mathemat-

ics.

In a traditional math classroom,

content knowledge moves through

the teacher to the student and there

is little other interaction. It’s often

described as the teacher being “the

sage on the stage.” With standards-

based math, content flow has all three

entities interacting: students with

the teacher, the teacher with the con-

tent, and the students with the con-

tent and each other.

Standards, although a good move

forward, cannot be the sole answer,

according to Porzio, because if they

are implemented poorly, the system

will still fall apart. And that’s where

he saw things in the early 1990s.

Questions for boardmembers to ask aboutmath instruction

School board members should maintain their “balcony perspective”

when it comes to district programs. However, board members also need to

ask the proper question of administration to make certain that what is being

implemented follows the direction that the board has set for the district.

The following questions from “Linking Research & Practice, The Nation-

al Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) Research Agenda Confer-

ence Report” are appropriate for board members to ask:

• Do we have a curriculum that prepares our students to be functional in

today’s society?

• Do our math assessments improve student learning?

• How has high-stakes testing affected the way our teachers teach math?

• Are our teachers using strategies that are specifically designed to close

the achievement gap in math?

• How has technology been integrated into our math curriculum?

And one overriding question always exists: How much money have we

budgeted for professional development for our math teachers?


The first NCTM standards from

the late 1980s were distributed, but

there was no training with teachers

on how to use them and teach to them.

“They just said, ‘here, teach to these,’”

he said.

The same thing happened when

calculators, smart boards and now

laptops and iPads started being more

common in classrooms. Without prop-

er training, many teachers are not

“modeling” proper use of technolo-

gy for students, Porzio said.

“School boards need to recog-

nize the appropriate use of technol-

ogy,” he added, and they need to

provide money for professional devel-

opment in its use. “If teachers don’t

understand how to help students

understand when technology is appro-

priate, you get into trouble.”

Pencils vs. calculators

In Porzio’s classes, students are

more likely to use a pencil and paper

or write on a whiteboard … not a

Promethean board but a plain white-

board … to show him their answers.

At the beginning of each year, he

tells his students that they may not

ever need a particular math skill that

he is teaching them, but they will

need to learn how to think in a par-

ticular way.

“My job is to make them better

critical thinkers and problem solvers,”

he said, “and I just happen to be using

math to do it. They may not remem-

ber a particular formula, but what

Recognizing mathematics proficiencyIllinois is one of the governing states in a 24-state

partnership developing Common Cores State Standards

assessments, according to Glenn W. “Max” McGee, who

serves on the committee developing elementary math

assessments.

The Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for

College and Careers (PARCC) has developed an eight-

point definition of what it means to be mathematically

proficient.

Mathematically proficient students:

1. Start by explaining to themselves the meaning of a

problem and looking for entry points to its solution.

They analyze givens, constraints, relationships and

goals. They make conjectures about the form and

meaning of the solution and plan a solution pathway

rather than simply jumping into a solution attempt.

2. Bring two complementary abilities to bear on prob-

lems involving quantitative relationships: the ability

to decontextualize (to abstract a given situation and

represent it symbolically and manipulate the repre-

senting symbols as if they have a life of their own,

without necessarily attending to their referents) and

the ability to contextualize (to pause as needed

during the manipulation process in order to probe

into the referents for the symbols involved).

3. Understand and use stated assumptions, definitions

and previously established results in constructing

arguments. They make conjectures and build a log-

ical progression of statements to explore the truth of

their conjectures. They are able to analyze situations

by breaking them into cases, and can recognize and

use counter examples.

4. Apply the mathematics they know to solve problems

arising in everyday life, society and the workplace.

In the early grades, this might be as simple as writ-

ing an addition equation to describe a situation.

5. Consider the available tools when solving a mathe-

matical problem. These tools might include pencil

and paper, concrete models, a ruler, a protractor, a

calculator, a spreadsheet, a computer algebra system,

a statistical package or dynamic geometry software.

They are sufficiently familiar with the tools to make

sound decisions about when each might be helpful,

recognizing both the insight to be gained and their

limitations.

6. Try to communicate precisely to others. They try

to use clear definitions, state the meaning of the sym-

bols they choose and calculate accurately and efficiently.

7. Look closely to discern a pattern or structure. They

can see complicated things, such as some algebraic

expressions, as single objects or as being composed

of several objects.

8. Notice if calculations are repeated and look both for

general methods and for shortcuts. They continual-

ly evaluate the reasonableness of their intermedi-

ate results.


they did to solve the problem may

help them think.”

As students file in for one of

Porzio’s math classes at IMSA, they

look like students at any other high

school. They tote heavy backpacks.

Some have pants that they’re tugging

up. Some are in hoodies.

They take their seats at vari-

ous tables around the room. Most

of IMSA’s classrooms are arranged

with tables that seat four or five, not

with rows of desks.

Porzio asks if his students have

“gifts” for him, and they all dutifully

hand in their homework from the day

before. Once the preliminaries are

over for the 75-minute class period,

students number off, then gather into

new groups and write a solution to

one of last night’s problems on the

board. One member from each group

explains how the answer was reached.

Porzio said before the class began

that these students had been work-

ing with probabilities and how to pre-

dict election results. That day, students

were working with Pascal’s triangle,

talking about Pascal’s “hockey sticks”

and working with binomial coeffi-

cients. Each problem, while illustra-

tive of the concept, was slightly

different and Porzio kept prompting

the students for more information

until everyone seemed to grasp the

lesson and could make suggestions

to the group.

IMSA president McGee said stu-

dents talk a lot about working togeth-

er in teams, and this illustrates how

math needs to be a collective effort.

“There isn’t as much interaction

when students are using iPads and

laptops as when they are working in

groups with paper and pencil,” McGee

said.

As the IMSA students worked in

groups, no heads were down on the

desk. No one was staring into space.

Everyone’s attention was on the board

and whoever was talking at the time.

These students were engaged and

enjoying complicated math theories.

Where’s the dis-connect?

So where and how do some stu-

dents lose interest in math? While

acknowledging the many great math

teachers in the state, Porzio par-

tially attributes it to the way teach-

ers are certified in Illinois.

Annual board self-evaluation ____

Clear mission, vision and goals ____

Solid community connection ____

Productive meetings ____

Strong board-superintendent relationship ____

Does your score add up? ____

Contact yourIASB field services director today!

100%

Springfield217/528-9688

Lombard630/629-3776

A system of EVALUATION starts at

the TOPwith theSchoolBoard!

How do you score?


Developing a mind for math actu-

ally begins in elementary school and

it’s about a way of thinking rather

than just the problems themselves,

he said.

However, “at institutions that

train and certify teachers, math is

required for all elementary educa-

tion majors,” Porzio explained. “Some-

one who hated math doesn’t learn

much more in college than they need

to pass.”

That teacher, especially in the

elementary classroom, does just what’s

necessary to teach math and prob-

ably not with the passion that a cer-

tified math instructor would have.

The problem can continue in high

school, McGee said, because “about

one-fourth of teachers in high school

math aren’t certified to do so.”

“Now we have a new group of kids

who hate math,” Porzio said. “It’s a

vicious cycle. Why can’t we have math

specialists like we have reading spe-

cialists?”

In addition, teachers in Illinois

are certified to teach grades K-8, but

algebra is being pushed down into

middle school. “We’ll have kids tell

us that when they got to certain chap-

ters, their teacher skipped those,” he

said. So even some of the best and

brightest in math haven’t always

received all the lessons they might

need.

As early as 1973, Morris Kline,

in Why Johnny Can’t Add: The fail-

ure of the new math, criticized the

way algebra was being taught. Kline,

who was a math professor, said stu-

dents were merely repeating a “bewil-

dering variety of processes” by rote

in order to master them. “They are

like pages torn from a hundred dif-

ferent books, no one of which con-

veys the life, meaning and spirit of

mathematics,” he wrote.

William McCallum, head of the

math department at the University

of Arizona and an author of the Com-

mon Core State Standards on math,

believes it’s time to convey “the life,

meaning and spirit” of algebra to stu-

dents. In a 2008 speech he titled

“Restoring and Balancing,” McCal-

lum said that “traditional curriculum

often left students unable to answer

the simplest conceptual questions

about functions” in algebra.

He advocates introducing the

concept of a function — the central,

unifying idea — rather than rote mem-

orization. This approach, he said,

motivates students by using realistic

contexts and by helping them grasp

abstract ideas and make them real.

The reality of math is what seems

to be the point of disconnect for some

students. Teachers stumped for lessons

that are more reality based can go to

various websites to find lessons regard-

ing specific math concepts.

That might be fine, but there’s

no way to know if those lessons are

good or not, Porzio said. That’s why,

as current president of the Illinois

Council of Teachers of Mathematics,

he and others are working to devel-

continued on page 20


principal in Olympia

CUSD 16, later return-

ing to the family farm

in Piatt County from

1979 until 2001. Helm

then returned to teach-

ing in 2004 in Panhandle CUSD 2 in

Raymond, and served as the FFA advi-

sor.

Clifton T. Holmes, 79, Alton, died

February 17, 2012. In 1975 he was elect-

ed to the Alton CUSD 11 school board,

serving for six years. He was president

of the board for the last two years. An

accountant, Holmes joined SM Wilson

and Co. in 1963 and spent many years

as their executive vice president/CFO

before retiring in 1998. He also served

10 years on the Alton Memorial Health

Systems Foundation Board of Direc-

tors.

Kermit Hustedt, 88, rural Paxton,

died March 26, 2012. He served 25 years

on the former Ford County School

Board. A lifetime farmer, he had been

a board member and past president of

the Elliot Farmers Grain and a board

member of Dix Patton Fire Protec-

tion District.

Maralee M. John-

son, 61, Springfield,

died March 21, 2012.

She had been a mem-

ber of the Pleasant

Plains CUSD 8 board,

including serving as president. She

worked for the Illinois Beef Association

for 23 years, the last 13 as executive

vice president. She also served on the

ACES Alumni Association Board for

the University of Illinois.

John R. Kammerer, 83, Lake For-

est, died February 5, 2012. He was a

former president of the Lake Forest

CHSD 115 school board. He founded a

food brokerage business, and later

bought a seat on the Chicago Mercan-

tile Exchange and operated as a trad-

er. He also sat on the boards for Boy

Scout Troops 46 and 49.

Edward Kapraun,

80, Benson, died March

12, 2012. He served on

Roanoke-Benson CUSD

60’s school board from

1965 to 1972. He was a

lifetime farmer and carpenter in the

Benson area, retiring in 1994. He also

had worked for Kent Lumber and Coal

of Benson for many years. He was a

member of the Knights of Columbus,

where he had served as Grand Knight

and treasurer.

Joseph J. Kubik,

76, Riverside, died

March 2, 2012. He

served two terms as a

member and president

of the Riverside-Brook-

field THSD 208 school board. After a

career in management with AT&T and

Lucent, he retired in 1989. As a young

man, he served as a medic in the U.S.

Army, and also served two terms as a

trustee for the village of Riverside.

Richard R. Lopez,

79, Sterling, died March

16, 2012. He served on

the Chadwick school

board for 14 years. He

worked at Northwest-

ern Steel and Wire in Sterling as an

overhead crane operator for 31 years,

retiring in 1995. Lopez coached Little

League baseball for many years.

Harry S. Morgan,

97, a 60-year resident

of Glenview, died Jan-

uary 20, 2012. He

served as a school board

member for nine years

in Glenview CCSD 34. An engineer, he

is known for designing the former Meigs

Field Terminal building, and the air-

plane bridge crossing over the entrance

road to O’Hare Airport. The founder of

Consoer, Morgan Architects, he also

designed both of the Thornton Frac-

tional high schools.

Hillard D. Morris, 90, Altamont,

died March 15, 2012. He served 12 years

on the Altamont CUSD 10 school board.

He owned and operated a 768-acre farm

in rural Mason. He served in the U.S.

Army during World War II in the Bat-

tle of the Bulge and earned a silver star

and two bronze stars. He had been chair-

man of the Effingham County Soil &

Water Conservation District for 34 years.

William B. Murry,

89, Sesser, died March

4, 2012. He formerly

served on the Franklin

County school board.

He worked at the Sess-

er Post Office for 32 years as a clerk.

Murry served in the U.S. Army in World

War II and was the last surviving for-

mer POW in Franklin County. He was

superintendent of the Du Quoin State

Fair for 56 years.

Norman H. Nelson,

87, Bloomington, died

February 12, 2012. He

once served as presi-

dent of the Park Forest

school board. He retired

in 1989 from Country Companies after

43 years as an insurance executive.

Nelson also served as the general chair-

man and co-chairman of the McLean

County United Way in 1978, was a for-

mer PTA chairman, and a former board

member of the Association of Com-

merce and Industry of McLean Coun-

ty.

Greg Novak, 61, Champaign, died

March 7, 2012. He was a current mem-

Milestones continued from page 40

ber for Champaign

CUSD 4 school board,

and a retired Unit 4 staff

member. Novak was

elected to the board in

2007 and he served as

parliamentarian. He retired from Cham-

paign schools in 2006 after having served

as librarian at Edison Middle School

from 1975 to 1991 and as librarian at

Jefferson Middle School from 1991 to

2006. He also served as president of the

Champaign Federation of Teachers from

2001 to 2006.

Gretchen (Goodall)

Parkhurst, 73, Spring-

field, died February 9,

2012. She served two

terms as the first woman

elected to the Athens

CUSD 213 school board. She retired

from the Illinois Department of Rev-

enue after 37 years, and was also a for-

mer member of Illinois Women in

Government and the National Associ-

ation of Female Executives.

Charles A. “Pete”

Peterson, 82, Chrisman,

died March 14, 2012.

He served on the

Hoopeston Area CUSD

11 school board and

was a past United Way chairman. He

was retired from John Deere and Ver-

milion Iron Works. Peterson operat-

ed the family farm until his retirement

and was very involved in Special

Olympics.

Glenn Petty, 80, Herrick, died

March 26, 2012. He had served on

the Herrick and Cowden school boards

for 11 years. He was a self-employed

tractor mechanic and the owner/oper-

ator of Petty Repair service for more

than 50 years. A member of Herrick

American Legion Post 839 for 40 years,

he also was instrumental in the design

and building of the veteran’s memori-

al in Herrick.

James E. Pickens,

74, Watseka, died March

12, 2012. He was past

president of the Iroquois

County CUSD 9 school

board. He owned and

operated Pickens Pharmacy and Wat-

seka Variety and News for more than

30 years. Pickens was also a member

of the Watseka Lions Club, Watseka

Elks Lodge and Shewami Country Club.

He previously served on the board of

directors of United Savings and Loan.

Frances Coleman

Powell, 102, Kenilworth,

died February 24, 2012.

She had served on the

Kenilworth SD 38 school

board. She was also a

Girl Scout and Brownie leader, and a

member of the Kenilworth Home and

Garden Club. A Northwestern Univer-

sity graduate, she traveled widely dur-

ing her long life, bringing back fond

memories of places that remain well

off the beaten path.

William F. “Bill”

Purcell, Jr., 48,

LaGrange, died Febru-

ary 27, 2012. He was in

his second four-year

term as a member of the

Lyons THSD 204 school board. As chair

of the facilities committee, he was instru-

mental in a district bond issue and

improvements in the swimming pool,

field house and performing arts center.

Purcell was a real estate developer, a

fundraiser for the American Cancer

Society and was a founding member of

the Relay Race for Hungry Children

Charity Run.

Daniel R. Romito,

76, Norridge, died March

2, 2012. He was a mem-

ber of the Ridgewood

High School Board for

more than 40 years,

serving as board president for 30 years.

At board meetings he was famous for

asking questions that called for care-

ful thought. But fellow school leaders

say he was also a great listener. In 2011

he was honored with a Those Who Excel

award from the Illinois State Board of

Education for outstanding service to

schools.

Stanley E. Rosen-

gren, 89, Serena Town-

ship, died March 20,

2012. A lifelong farmer

in the Serena area, he

had served on the Ser-

ena Grade School board

of education. He held memberships in

the Serena Lions Club, LaSalle Coun-

ty Farm Bureau and was a past trustee

for the Serena Fire District.

John C. Sefton, 87,

Brownstown, died Feb-

ruary 13, 2012. He was

a former school board

member in Brownstown

CUSD 201. He worked

for Grady Marchman before starting

his own business, Sefton & Sons Con-

struction of Brownstown. Sefton was

one of the original six members of VFW

Post 9770, and was a member of the

WWII Liberators.

Orvan D. Speer, 87, Mattoon, for-

merly of Macomb and Bushnell, died

March 3, 2012. He was a former mem-

ber of the Bushnell-Prairie City CUSD

170 school board. He was a lifelong busi-

nessman in Bushnell, serving as co-

owner of Parker-Speer Dodge Chrysler

Inc. and P & S Mobile Home Sales. He

was also a 50-year member of the Bush-

nell Odd Fellows.

Frank Stewart, 66,

Joliet, died February 9,

2012. He served on the

Joliet Grade School

board from 1987 to

2005. He was a long-

time Will County Board member and



community advocate. Stewart, the coun-

ty board’s minority whip, and a mem-

ber since 1996, was a diabetic and was

on a waiting list for a kidney transplant

at the time of his death. He was a mem-

ber of the National Association of Coun-

ties’ health committee.

The Illinois School Board Journal

welcomes news about or from Illinois

school leaders. News may include but

need not be limited to accomplishments,

changes in position or duties, retirement,

death and other milestones related to

board/district duties. For more infor-

mation about submitting news items,

phone the Communications Department

at 217/528-9688, ext. 1138, or e-mail gad-

kins@iasb. com.

op their website as a “members-only

go-to” place for teachers.

A drop-off in school funding has

meant fewer dollars dedicated for

teachers to belong to professional

associations such as ICTM, he said.

Membership in Illinois, which had

been about 3,000, has dropped by

two-thirds over the past few years.

“We have to do things to make

organizations like ICTM worthwhile,”

Porzio said. “We need to say what the

research base is with metrics and evi-

dence to show that it works with stu-

dents.”

Sometimes a little nudge from

popular culture can help as well.

On the CBS drama, “Numb3rs,”

Charlie Eppes was a mathematical

genius who helped his brother Don,

an FBI agent, solve crimes. Watching

Charlie at the blackboard using sophis-

ticated equations to show probabil-

ities was fascinating.

If NBC’s “Bill Nye The Science

Guy,” and Jamie Hyneman and Adam

Savage on the Discovery Channel’s

“Mythbusters” are enough to help

spur kids to want to pursue science

as a career, maybe seeing Charlie

Eppes “model” math as fun and excit-

ing will help mend the disconnect for

teens and math … and make it seem

like the “cool” thing to do.

And that in turn will make CEOs

like Eric Spiegel of Siemens Corpo-

ration very happy. In an op-ed piece

for the Atlanta Journal Constitution

last December, Spiegel wrote, “… we

need to instill the value of science,

math and technology in our kids in

their earliest years. It doesn’t matter

if they are going to be engineers or

not. It doesn’t even matter if they

plan to go to college or not. Their

future — and ours — depends on their

ability to master a skill set they’ll need

in the jobs of the future.”

Oh, and the answer to the puz-

zle is 26– 63 = 1. Two to the sixth pow-

er is 64, minus 63, equals one.

ReferencesIllinois Council of Teachers of Math-

ematics website, http://www.ictm.org/

Judith Jacobs, A Winning Formula

for Mathematics Instruction: Con-

verting Research into Results, Educa-

tional Research Service, Alexandria,

Virginia, 2011

Morris Kline, Why Johnny Can’t

Add: The failure of the new math, St

Martin’s Press, 1973

William McCallum, “Restoring and

Balancing,” speech, June 2008

Erik Robelen, “Middle-Schoolers

Like Math, But P.E. More Popular, Sur-

vey Finds,” Education Week,

www.blogs.edweek.org/edweek/cur-

riculum2012/12/03/middle_school-

ers_like_math_but.html

Eric Spiegel, “Get over your math-

science aversion,” Atlanta Journal

Constitution, December 5, 2011

Figuring out a way continued from page 17

Whether you call it SettingDistrict Goals and Direction,

strategic planning, or values and beliefs/

mission/vision/goals work,school boards are responsible

for clarifying the district’s purpose.

An IASB Field Services Director brings expertise about the school board’s role in this work.

For more information, contact your Field Services Director today!

Setting DistrictGoals and Direction

Springfield 217/528-9688 • Lombard 630/629-3776


The 14th Amendment of the U.S.

Constitution placed the respon-

sibility for public education under

each state’s jurisdiction. Since 1975

when Public Law 94-142 (the orig-

inal special education law) went into

effect, the federal government has

increasingly influenced public edu-

cation. Through federal legislation

and funding, mandates for testing and

accountability have increased.

It was increasingly apparent to

progressive state leaders that regain-

ing state-level control over education

means states would have to work

together and create mutually agreed

upon common standards. The Coun-

cil of Chief State School Officers

(CCSSO) and the National Gover-

nors Association Center for Best Prac-

tices (NGA Center) organized the

work.

On June 10, 2011, the K-12 Com-

mon Core State Standards were

released. Illinois was an early adopter

and has influential positions within

the governing bodies of CCSS and its

assessment consortium, Partnership

for Assessment of Readiness for Col-

lege and Careers (PARCC).

The CCSS are based on current

educational research. They focus on

preparing all students to be college

and career ready. They are reported

as being fewer and more clearly writ-

ten than most state standards, and

they reflect the work that states with

standards had already accomplished,

as well as the knowledge and skills

required for international academic

and career success.

The standards are written for

grades K-12. English Language Arts

(ELA) and mathematic standards

have been released. Work is currently

being done on science and social stud-

ies standards. The ELA standards

include K-5 foundational reading

skills, informational text, literature,

writing, speaking and listening, lan-

guage, and literacy across the con-

tent areas (history/social studies,

science and technical subjects).

Although all areas of ELA will be

important, the shift in information-

al texts and writing will be notable.

Math standards include math

practices and math content. Math

practices require students to make

sense of problems and persevere in

solving them, reason quantitatively

and abstractly, construct viable argu-

ments, and critique the reasoning of

others. It is worth noting that in some

districts the change in academic

expectations for math will come two

grade levels lower. In other words,

sixth-grade math content will now

be taught in fourth grade. This will

not be universally true, nor does it

include all math content. But there

is definitely a shift in rigor and expec-

tations.

As of early April, five states had

not as yet officially adopted Common

Donna McCaw

recently retired

from WIU and

currently works

with the Com-

mon Core Insti-

tute. Stuart Yager

is an associate

professor educa-

tional leadership

at Western Illi-

nois University in

Macomb. Rene

Noppe and Carol

Webb are assis-

tant professors in

educational lead-

ership at WIU.

Academic game changer …Implementing Common CoreState Standards in Illinois

by Donna McCaw , Stuart Yager, Carol Webb and Rene Noppe,

Part I: Common Core 101School reform movements are not new to policy and decision

makers. Each decade seems to have brought at least one new idea

or program that would “fix” a system that many believed to be bro-

ken. This is the first in a four-part series giving school board mem-

bers background knowledge on the Common Core State Standards

(CCSS), the potential impact these new standards will have on

teaching and learning, things for boards to look for and district

implementation issues.



Core standards: Alaska, Minnesota,

Nebraska, Texas and Virginia. A map

showing states and when they adopt-

ed CCSS can be found at http://

www.corestandards.org/in-the-

states.

The federal government’s involve-

ment has been focused on funding

the creation of new state student tests.

The inability for many of the state

common core consortia members to

fund the creation of a new assess-

ment to accompany the new stan-

dards resulted in two federal

grant-funded state assessments to be

created. CCSS states were given the

option of joining SMARTER Balanced

Consortium (SBAC) or PARCC. Illi-

nois selected PARCC.

The new third- through 11th-

grade student state tests will begin in

2014-2015. Descriptions of the Com-

mon Core State Standards can be

found at http://www.corestandards.

org and PARCC assessment infor-

mation can found at http://www.

parcconline.org/. Additionally, the

National Parent Teacher Association

has information on its website regard-

ing the standards at http://www.

pta.org/common_core_state_stan-

dards.asp.

What do the standards look like?

To get a sense of how much dif-

ferent the new standards are, let’s

look at the youngest learners’ expec-

tations: kindergarten math and writ-

ing. By the end of kindergarten,

students will be expected to do the

following in math:

• Count objects to tell how many

there are.

• Compare two groups of objects

to tell which group, if either, has

more; compare two written num-

bers to tell which is greater.

• Act out addition and subtraction

word problems and draw diagrams.

to represent them.

• Add with a sum of 10 or fewer; sub-

tract from a number 10 or fewer;

and solve addition and subtraction

word problems

• Add and subtract very small num-

bers quickly and accurately (e.g.,

3 + 1).

• Name shapes regardless of orien-

tation or size (e.g., a square ori-

ented as a “diamond” is still a

square) (National Association of

Parent Teachers’ Association, 2012,

p. 3).

At the end of kindergarten, stu-

dents will be expected to do the fol-

lowing in writing:

• Use a combination of drawing, dic-

tating and writing to compose opin-

ion pieces in which they tell a reader

the topic or the name of the book

they are writing about and state

an opinion or preference about the

topic or book (e.g., My favorite book

is …).


tating and writing to compose infor-

mative/explanatory texts in which

they name what they are writing

about and supply some informa-

tion about the topic.


tating, and writing to narrate a sin-

gle event or several loosely linked

events, tell about the events in the

order in which they occurred, and

provide a reaction to what hap-

pened.

Most significant about these

requirements is that kindergarten is

currently not required in the Illinois

School Code. Current Illinois Learn-

ing Standards (ILS) are written for

kindergarten through third grade,

but no ILS standards were written

just for kindergarten.

One current ILS in math reads:

Compare the numbers of objects in

groups.

In the new CCSS for kindergarten,

the standard will read: Identify whether

the number of objects in one group

is greater than, less than or equal to

the number of objects in another

group, e.g., by using matching and

counting strategies. (Include groups

with up to 10 objects.)

The differences in expectations

are self-explanatory.

What do the new

assessments look like?

The requirements set by the U.S.

Department of Education necessi-

tated student performance to be reflect-

ed in a new generation of assessments

reflective of real-world applications.

And they needed to challenge stu-

dents to use higher levels of reason-

ing and thinking skills.

As the world around has become

more complex and more competi-

One current ILS in math reads: Com -

pare the numbers of objects in groups.

In the new CCSS for kindergarten, the

standard will read: Identify whether

the number of objects in one group is

greater than, less than or equal to the

number of objects in another group,

e.g., by using matching and counting

strategies. (Include groups with up to

10 objects.)

tive, the National Governors Associ-

ation and the CCSSO determined

that U.S. students needed to go deep-

er into content, “master” skills pre-

viously only “covered,” and develop

critical thinking skills. Samples of

the assessment questions are sched-

uled by PARCC to be released late

this summer. Some ROEs and private

professional development providers

are giving us glimpses into what they

might look like.

“Improving middle school stu-

dents’ achievement by just two score

points in each subject area would

have a cascading effect over the suc-

ceeding levels of education,” said

Kevin Baird, executive director of

College and Career Readiness, a not-

for-profit organization that provides

up-to-date information on imple-

mentation processes and planning.

“The 13-point increase in the per-

centage of high school graduates ready

for college-level mathematics should

later produce about 25,000 additional

degree completers at two- and four-

year colleges (and about 25,000 few-

er college dropouts) each year in the

United States.

“Extrapolating from U.S. Bureau

of Labor Statistics estimates (U.S.

Department of Labor, 2007), these

new degree completers would enjoy

an increase of close to $500 million

per year in their combined average

salary (i.e., about $20,000 per per-

son) and a drop in their average unem-

ployment rate of 2 percentage points.”

Schools now find themselves

in an exciting and yet unchartered

academic position. No change, since

the inception of special education

into public schools, has required the

types of instructional and curricular

movements that this opportunity will

afford. With limited time and limit-

ed resources, informed decisions are

more needed than ever.

The next three articles will exam-

ine in greater detail: the major shifts

that will have to take place within

most classrooms, what exactly this

means to policy, more specific infor-

mation about the assessments, how

to shape public information sessions

and possible next steps.

Part II: July/August — Shifting

the focus

Part III: September/October —

What to look for

Part IV: November/December —

Eating the elephant

FAQs about the Common Core State Standards

Aren’t these really federal standards? No. The stan-

dards allow for the development of consistent skills and

knowledge across adopted state educational systems but

are not mandated by the federal government. The fed-

eral government is funding the creation of the state assess-

ments, for which there are two choices. The state-level

options to adopt the CCSS and the option to use either

of the two testing consortia place the emphasis of

these new standards at the constitutionally supported

state decision-making level.

Will we now have a federal curriculum? No. We

will have greater uniformity of standards but uniquely

individualized methods of teaching and assessing the

next generation of students.

Did anyone dissent regarding the CCSS? Yes. Some

individuals, groups and organizations do not agree with

implementing CCSS. Examples of their concerns range

from not viewing this as good for all children and as a

movement toward a national curriculum and away from

local control.

Will this cost our district money? Probably. Depend-

ing on how 21st century your current curriculum and

instructional practices are, your teachers and admin-

istrators may need professional development in areas

related to curriculum alignment, research-based instruc-

tional and assessment practices, and new instructional

materials. Questions also exist related to managing the

immense amounts of data and monitoring that will go

with properly implementing the new standards. There

is a sincere hope that the ultimate return on your invest-

ment will be found in better-prepared college students

and a strengthened workforce.




Teacher evaluations are the key

to success under the Illinois

Education Reform Act (SB7) — and

there is simply no substitute for prop-

er and thorough evaluation. While

evaluation used to be a purely admin-

istrative function that rarely came

before the board except during dis-

cipline or dismissal proceedings, eval-

uations have now become a necessary

part of the operation of a school dis-

trict for a board of education.

It is likely that the board will sud-

denly become much more familiar

with evaluations, both because the

law requires board input in changes

to the evaluation tool, and also because

the evaluation will now become crit-

ical to many more of the staffing deci-

sions administration must make. If

evaluation is not thoroughly com-

pleted and reviewed at the beginning

of the year, the board may be pow-

erless to RIF (to cut costs) at the end

of the year.

Review of new RIF rules

In addition to many other

changes, SB7 changes the way reduc-

tions in force (RIFs) are conducted.

RIFs (otherwise known as lay-offs, or

a reduction in the number of total

employees or programs) are no longer

done in reverse-seniority order, where

the least senior employees would be

RIF’d first. Under SB7, teachers with

lower evaluation scores will be placed

into a grouping that will require them

to be RIF’d before better performing

teachers. The groupings have default

requirements defined by law:

Grouping 1: Each teacher not in

contractual continued service who

has not received a performance eval-

uation rating.

Grouping 2: Each teacher with

a Needs Improvement or Unsatis-

factory performance evaluation rat-

ing on either of the teacher’s last two

performance evaluations.

Grouping 3: Each teacher with

a performance evaluation rating of

at least Satisfactory or Proficient on

both of the teacher’s last two perfor-

mance evaluation ratings, if two rat-

ings are available, or on the teacher’s

last performance evaluation rating,

if only one rating is available, unless

the teacher qualifies for placement

into Grouping 4.

Grouping 4: Each teacher whose

last two performance evaluation rat-

ings are Excellent and each teacher

with two Excellent performance eval-

uation ratings out of the teacher’s last

three performance evaluation ratings

with a third rating of Satisfactory

or Proficient.

Grouping 2 teachers must be

removed before Grouping 3 teach-

ers, and Grouping 3 teachers before

Grouping 4. Grouping 1 teachers are

honorably reduced (RIF’d) at the

board’s discretion. Unfortunately, the

law does not necessarily contemplate

what happens when the district does

not have “perfect” evaluations already

in place.

Missing or defective evaluations

Typically a board member only

reviews evaluations in either a dis-

ciplinary or dismissal outcome for

an employee. However, the new law

imposes stiff penalties on districts

where evaluations are not carefully

and fully documented. When a dis-

trict has evaluations that do not clear-

ly direct how an employee must

perform to get better, the district will

have a great deal of difficulty RIFing

employees.

Notice and an opportunity to “get

better” are important to be fair to

employees. While the law does not

require any particular type of notice,

the most reliable way of avoiding the

cost and risk of a lawsuit is to give an

employee ample warning that he or

David J. Braun is

an attorney with

Miller, Tracy,

Braun, Funk &

Miller, Ltd. in

Champaign and

has presented at

IASB meetings

on numerous

legal topics.

After nearly a year …What we’ve learned, how to deal with SB7 evaluation mandates

by David J. Braun


she is likely to be out of a job if per-

formance is not improved.

While boards do not often get

involved in the evaluation itself, the

law now requires the board to appoint

members to a committee to change

the evaluation. Moreover, the board

will not be able to cost-effectively lay

people off if it suffers litigation because

employees feel it is “unfair” that they

do not know why they ended up in

one grouping instead of another.

For this reason, it is critical that

the board clearly communicates ear-

ly in the year what it expects to have

the power to do at the end of the year

so that administration may assure

that evaluations are being thoroughly

conducted to meet those goals.

But what if the district already

lacks evaluations? Many questions

have come up, such as:

• What happens when an employee

is missing an evaluation?

• What if there are no evaluations?

• What if there are only a handful of

evaluations?

• What if there are just a few employ-

ees missing some (but not all) eval-

uations?

The question is further compli-

cated when the majority of employ-

ees have a particular evaluation rating

(such as Satisfactory which might

land them into Grouping 3, which

will cause them to be reduced in

seniority order) and just one employ-

ee missing evaluation ratings is rat-

ed outside the majority (by a rating

such as Excellent or Needs Improve-

ment).

An employee who is RIF’d may

argue he or she was not treated fair-

ly, or worse, was discriminated against

because of age, gender, religion, race

or other protected class.

The board must ensure evalua-

tions are being performed thoroughly

during the year, or the board will be

powerless even to conduct RIFs at

the end of the year. Creative solu-

tions, unfortunately, are all fraught

with significant danger:

Re-defining Grouping 1

The law defines Grouping 1 as

consisting of non-tenured teachers

who have no performance evaluation

ratings, and then gives districts dis-

cretion in dismissal of those teach-

ers. But what if a district chooses not

to evaluate teachers in Grouping 1

so that they may have the discretion

to dismiss them?

Placement of a teacher into

Grouping 1 may subject the district

to the argument that it did not com-

ply with the law requiring annual eval-

uation for non-tenured teachers.

Further, the proposed solution does

not address the open issue of what to

do with tenured teachers missing

evaluations.

Only proper and well-supported

evaluations will allow the district to

comply with the law and reduce the

likelihood of a lawsuit by providing

the employees with the fairness they

seek. Every level of district operation

must ensure such evaluations are

being conducted if the board wants

to have the ability to RIF at the end

of the year.


Grouping 4 includes teachers

with evaluation ratings of Excellent

on two of their last three evaluations.

The law permits a district to change

the definition of Grouping 4. In fact,

the law requires joint committee dis-

cussion of the definition of Grouping

4.

But even though the law requires

this discussion, pre-determining the

outcome of an evaluation to “avoid

litigation” (that is, dishonestly eval-

uating employees) likely subjects the

district to process challenge, because

the district’s process does not com-

ply with the law’s requirements of

honest and thorough evaluation. More-

over, employees who are RIF’d under

the system will argue it is not only

illegal, but unfair because they were

not offered the opportunity to “out-

perform” their peers.


Grouping 3 is defined by inclu-

sion of each teacher with a Satisfac-

tory or Proficient on their last

performance evaluation or last two

performance evaluations. [105 ILCS

5/24-12(b)]. It appears that Grouping

3 is the “default” grouping if there is

a rating, but what if the district’s eval-

uation plan establishes a maximum

evaluation (ill advised) frequency?

In other words, what if the dis-

trict’s contract or evaluation plan pre-

vents the district from evaluating a

teacher more frequently than the

legal minimum of once every other

Only proper and well-supported eval-

uations will allow the district to com-

ply with the law and reduce the likeli-

hood of a lawsuit by providing the

employees with the fairness they seek.

Every level of district operation must

ensure such evaluations are being con-

ducted if the board wants to have the

ability to RIF at the end of the year.


year for tenured teachers? If the dis-

trict’s procedures and policies make

more frequent evaluation against the

rules, then only a discussion with the

union and the joint committee can

fix that issue of whether or not the

district is “grandfathered.”

(A “grandfathered” district is one

that has a collective bargaining agree-

ment currently in effect that is in con-

flict with the law and was signed before

January 1, 2011. “Grandfathering”

is very limited and complicated under

SB7, so specific advice should be

sought on the extent to which a dis-

trict is grandfathered.)

Moreover, pre-determining the

outcome of evaluations to place

employees into this grouping will

likely expose the district to a lawsuit

for failure to strictly comply with

evaluation law.

The only legal and fair solution

A district with evaluation defects

such as those described above must

discuss the issue with the union and

an SB7-required joint committee made

up of an equal representation of board-

selected members and union- or

RIF/evaluation checklistEmployers must make sure they address the following issues by the appropriate deadlines. The follow-

ing list is a summary of the major duties and deadlines. A district should always check its own contracts and

policies for additional practices and deadlines, and should consult its own attorney for fact-specific advice.

Duty Deadline

Meet with RIF joint committee Before December 1, 2011, and, if necessary, in sub-

sequent years by dates in contract

Reach agreements with joint committee to change

RIF procedure

Before February 1 of any year in which there will

be a RIF

Create and provide sequence of honorable reduc-

tion list to union

Before 75 calendar days prior to the end of the

school year

Change teachers falling into Grouping 1 to another

Grouping by completing an evaluation

Before 45 calendar days prior to the end of the

school year

Create and provide qualifications list to union Before May 10

Conduct necessary RIFs Before 45 calendar days prior to the end of the

school year unless contract or policy provides a

different time-frame

Alter evaluation with four categories: Excellent,

Proficient, Needs Improvement, Unsatisfactory

Before September 1, 2012

Change evaluation plan to one that incorporates

student growth data by meeting with PERA joint

committee

Within 180 days of first meeting of Evaluation Joint

Committee and before PERA deadline

September 1

2012 – At least 300 Chicago schools and any

school receiving a Federal School Improvement

Grant

2013 – All remaining Chicago schools

2015 – Lowest performing 20% of schools

2016 – All other schools


teacher-selected members. Be aware

that these are not the same entity.

The joint committee must reach

agreement on RIF process changes

by February 1 of any year to impact

RIFs for that year. This actually should

be done as early as possible.

Even after February 1 of any giv-

en year, the joint committee may

have to be an ongoing part of the dis-

cussion regarding RIFs. It is critical

that the district have agreement from

both the union and the joint com-

mittee for purpose of avoiding polit-

ical fall-out and toxic distrust in

bargaining.

However, the district should not

be deluded into believing that agree-

ment with the union or joint com-

mittee will “cure” the defect and

prevent legal challenge. Without case

law to interpret what is required when

a defect has occurred prior to imple-

mentation of the law, the district is

at the mercy of the courts when a

challenge is brought, potentially by

anyone who is reduced, regardless of

the grouping definition or rules.

Evaluations completed —

now what?

You have done the work, you have

agreed with your joint committee,

and you are ready to begin your RIFs.

The law requires that, not lat-

er than 75 calendar days prior to the

conclusion of any school year, the

district produce a sequence of hon-

orable dismissal list. The list is a

sort of “groupings” list, which defines

employees by grouping depending

on their evaluations. A teacher with

two evaluation ratings of Needs

Improvement may end up in Group-

ing 2, but a teacher with two Satis-

factory evaluation ratings and an

Excellent evaluation rating will be

placed into Grouping 3.

This list is critical to conducting

RIFs, because Grouping 2 teachers

will be the first teachers reduced

(unless the board has Grouping 1

teachers it elects to reduce), before

reducing Grouping 3 teachers and

finally Grouping 4 teachers.

Because the list is likely to cause

some discomfort for employees who

ExecutiveSearchES

ILLINOIS ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BOARDS

The Gold Standard of Executive Searches

Three Reasons to Choose IASB1. Boards are our priority — We approach the entire process from your point of view, with your

needs in mind. We offer a personal approach that’s tailored to your district and its particular needs.

2. Resources and Experience — Tap into the resources of your entire association. We havedecades of experience conducting searches and we advise you in every facet of the selectionprocess, including reaching consensus on the many decisions that must be made during an effec-tive superintendent search.

3. Value — When you choose IASB, you put the entire strength of your dues dollars to work. IASBoffers a complete service with cost below most firms. Let us do the paperwork and the legwork –while you make the decision!

For information contact:

2921 Baker Drive One Imperial Place

Springfield, IL 62703 1 East 22nd Street, Suite 20

217/528-9688, ext. 1217 Lombard, IL 60148

630/629-3776, ext. 1217

www.iasb.com/executive


are not accustomed to being ranked

based on their evaluations, and because

it is possible that not everyone will

be placed appropriately, it is advis-

able to send the list to the union as

early as possible.

After the list has been confirmed,

the next step is for the district to

assess what reductions in force will

be necessary, if it has not already

done so. After determining what pro-

grams may be reduced or what staffing

requirements must be met, the dis-

trict should review the list to deter-

mine which employees in the

qualification category to be reduced

are located in the grouping to be

reduced. Notices must be delivered

by or before 45 calendar days before

the end of the year, although earlier

notice may be required by contract

or policy.

But what if the district is “grand-

fathered”? The law does not exempt

a district from producing a groupings

list, even if it is still permitted to RIF

under the old “seniority” laws. The

district should produce a groupings

list, even if the list will not be used

this year.

After the list is produced but

before the board takes action on RIFs,

the union must be notified of the RIFs.

Under SB7, the joint committee

must reach agreement on process

changes by February 1 of any year of

RIFs for the change to affect that year’s

RIFs. However, nothing in SB7 has

removed or changed the requirement

to bargain. The question, therefore,

is whether or not the union, which

is not the same as the joint com-

mittee, may make a change that affects

the RIF process after February 1.

Because the law is not clear, the safest

way to handle these questions is to

have the bargaining meetings when

the union requests them, but to be

exceedingly careful, avoiding changes

to the process agreed to by the joint

committee.

Recall option

Recall questions are already

becoming an issue. “Recall” happens

when a position becomes available

after a RIF, and the employee who

was RIF’d has a right to that position.

Recall is a right of a RIF’d employee.

Prior to SB7, there was no right

to recall for a non-tenured teacher.

In fact, under old law, there was only

a “nonrenewal” for a non-tenured

teacher, meaning that there was no

distinction between a “dismissal

for cause” and a RIF.

Under new law, all teachers must

be grouped, including non-tenured

teachers. Therefore, there are now

two methods to remove a non-tenured

teacher: by dismissing the teacher

based on performance (although no

cause must be shown in the notice

dismissing a non-tenured teacher not

in his or her final year of non-tenured

service), or by dismissing the teacher

“honorably,” also known as a RIF.

At this time, it remains an open

question whether or not a district

with unclear or nonexistent con-

tractual language defining recall will

be considered “grandfathered.”

Because contractual language is a fact

question, we are without any court

cases to explain how the court will

Showcase your talented students at Joint Annual Conference!

It’s easy ...Upload a video of 10 minutes or

less to YouTube and send thelink to: Linda Dawson [email protected]. Onemiddle school and one high

school will be selected. Selectedvideos will be shown prior tothe First and Second GeneralSessions

Deadline to enter:

Friday, June 15, 2012For complete submission

criteria, go to http://www.iasb.com/jac12/selectioncriteria.pdf


apply the law. However, it is always

safest, if a district wants to ensure a

non-tenured teacher may not return,

to evaluate that teacher specifically

addressing his or her weaknesses,

and then dismiss the employee.

Conclusion: diligence

As we near the year mark fol-

lowing the signing of the Illinois Edu-

cation Reform Act (SB7) on June 13,

2011, we are beginning to get a sense

of the effects of the new SB7 require-

ments.

Even though school districts have

new mandates from law (which tell

us “what” to do), we have yet to see

regulations (the rules that tell us

“how” to do it) or case law (telling us

what it all “means”).

Because the law was created

by many different interested groups,

effective and legal solutions require

careful analysis and cooperation —

working with unions, statewide orga-

nizations and interested bodies, such

as members of the Illinois Statewide

School Management Alliance part-

ners and the Illinois State Board of

Education, as well as lawyers and

advisors is critical to the successful,

and cost effective, compliance with

the law. Only by working together

will we all be able to assure that we

understand the results of our actions

before we take them.

Ultimately, every teacher, staff

member, board member, school ser-

vice member and property tax payer

in Illinois is directly affected by the

changes in SB7. With so much of the

state directly impacted by this leg-

islation, answers will come with time.

In the meantime, safety exists

in slow progress, careful considera-

tion, forthright communication and

honest evaluation.

Using technology toenhance your

board effectiveness through online

services, such as ...

PRESS, the IASB sample policy and procedure service —

A calendar year subscription to PRESS provides easy Internetaccess 24/7 to sample board policies and administrative procedures, links to legal references and cross references, and an excellent search engine.

School Board Policies Online — IASB will publish your board policy manual online for easyInternet access by the board, staff, students, parents and thecommunity. This online manual will have all of the featuresessential for effectively communicating your board policy,including links to legal references, jumps to cross references,and the same excellent search engine used for PRESS online.

BoardBook® — IASB’s newest online service provides for electronic boardmeetings and board packet preparation and distribution.

Contact IASB Policy Services today for information:630/629-3776 or 217/528-9688Ext. 1214 or [email protected] or [email protected]

IASBPolicyServices



Teacher and staff evaluations

can be a thorny issue. While

almost everyone agrees that, in the-

ory, they can be excellent tools for

supporting staff development and

performance, and for increasing stu-

dent achievement, evaluations remain

problematic.

We all know stories of evalua-

tions that were too subjective or that

served to demoralize rather than sup-

port and develop, and of processes

that are time and paper intensive,

providing little real benefit to any-

one. As every school district in Illi-

nois wrestles with the technical issues

in the Illinois Education Reform Act

(SB7), we should not forget that an

effective teacher evaluation process

should increase teachers’ abilities to

affect student achievement.

So how can board members influ-

ence and help optimize a district’s

performance management or evalu-

ation process to make it more effec-

tive?

Here are seven tried and true

practices to guide your efforts:

Identify goals for the process.

Before beginning any change process,

be clear about the goals for the teacher

and staff evaluations. Ask questions

like: What are we trying to accom-

plish? What data needs to be gath-

ered? Who needs to be involved?

What do we want to change as a result

of conducting these evaluations?

District goals should always direct

all district efforts. Primarily, an eval-

uation process is to ensure that the

district’s teachers and staff are meet-

ing the high standards set by the board

of education and working to improve

student achievement. Your district

goal may be to improve knowledge,

skills or performance in particular

areas of the curriculum. But as board

members you also may be trying to

increase accountability or alignment

to board and district goals.

Being clear about goals at the

onset will help direct all efforts and

help to measure the effectiveness

of the evaluation process down the

road.

Carefully optimize the process

and forms. Encourage those in charge

of the actual process to keep things

as simple as possible but to adhere

to the selected process in every detail.

Forms should use clear, consis-

tent and appropriate rating scales

within the proscribed rubric. Boards

should receive decision support data

wherever needed. Evaluators should

have easy access to as much infor-

mation about staff members, evalu-

ation criteria and support resources

as possible so that they can quickly

and effectively complete their eval-

uations.

Teachers and staff should receive

high-quality feedback, direction and

the development they need to improve

and succeed. The easier it is for staff

to complete the forms and process,

the more likely they’ll participate and

gain benefit from that process.

While it can be helpful to look at

what other boards and districts are

doing, processes and forms should

meet the district’s specific needs (as

well as the intent of the new statute),

use “language” that is familiar to the

staff, and address specific goals and

requirements.

Provide resources and require

Adam Cobb is

regional manager

with Halogen

Software. He

focuses on help-

ing K-12 schools,

boards and dis-

tricts optimize

teacher and staff

evaluation

processes and

overall talent

management

practices. He can

be reached at

acobb@halo

gensoftware.com.

Seven tips toward makingevaluations more effective

by Adam Cobb


training for everyone necessary on

how to use the forms and follow the

process. This means how to use the

evaluation forms, the evaluation cri-

teria, the performance rating scale

and what each rating means, and

everyone’s role in the process. They

should understand what steps the

process may include (e.g., walk-

throughs, self-reporting, etc.) so that

they know what to expect.

Using new language and process

will require resources of time and

money both for initial and ongoing

or refresher training. Everyone involved

should know what is expected of them,

and when and how they can get help

if they need it.

Communicate the benefits of

effective performance management.

One of the things we often forget to

do is tell people what’s in it for them.

Effective performance management

can provide numerous benefits to the

individual and the school board,

including: better educator perfor-

mance; increased ability to identify

and address development needs;

improved ability to attract top teach-

ers and staff; and, ultimately, improved

student achievement.

To engage staff in the performance

management process and help them

see its value, district leadership must

communicate long-term career and

student performance benefits on

an ongoing basis.

Provide resources of both time

and money so that evaluators are

trained on performance management

best practices. This is perhaps one

of the most important items. Man-

aging employee performance is not

an easy skill. Most people don’t innate-

ly know how to give helpful feedback,

how to coach, how to write effective

goals, even how to identify appro-

priate and effective professional devel-

opment activities.

Those who manage and evaluate

the performance of others can also

greatly benefit from training in per-

sonality types, communication styles,

learning styles, etc., to help increase

their interpersonal effectiveness. Here

again, introductory as well as ongo-

ing/refresher training is important,

so those items should be part of the

goals and a budget priority.

Due dates and expectations for

the process should be clearly com-

municated. Because the process and

requirements are clear and impor-

tant to superintendents and princi-

pals, it’s easy to forget that they’re

not always clear to the board. Boards

should ask for regular status reports

on the implementation of the evalu-

ation plan, including questions like:

Who has been trained? How have we

communicated our efforts with the

staff? What is our plan for conduct-

ing the various activities required by

the plan? While the board won’t be

involved in the details of evaluating

teachers, understanding the process

will help the board to monitor progress

and will build trust if and when the

board is expected to make important

personnel decisions.

Ask for feedback on how the

process went and encourage incre-

mental improvements. Every year,

the evaluation process itself also needs

to be evaluated. Administrators should

convey information to the board that

answers the following questions:

• What worked well and what didn’t?

• Where and how could the process

be simplified?

• Did everyone involved get the infor-

mation needed?

• Were enough resources of time and

money allotted?

• Has the district met state and/or

district requirements?

• Is the evaluation process helping

the board achieve its goals?

• Is the process helping to support

staff performance and development?

• Are participation rates on target?

By continuously monitoring

teacher/staff evaluation processes

from the board’s perspective, and

then by providing the needed resources

of both time and money to implement

improvements, everyone can be

assured that the plan is being imple-

mented properly and is meeting the

board expectations.

Boards should ask for regular status reports on the implementation

of the evaluation plan, including questions like: Who has been

trained? How have we communicated our efforts with the staff?

What is our plan for conducting the various activities required by

the plan?



This is the time of the year that

school boards and superin-

tendents begin seriously thinking

about budget figures for the coming

school year. Part of any of those

budget decisions should be how

much to allot for board members to

attend professional development

events.

Because of changes in state statute

adding mandatory training for school

board members in education and

labor law, financial oversight and

accountability, and fiduciary respon-

sibilities, plus a new statewide man-

date for all elected officials to have

training in the Open Meetings Act,

some of these professional develop-

ment costs are not just at the board’s

discretion. They are costs that will

have to be incurred.

The costs listed here will not be

the same for every school board or

for every location. Costs will vary

depending on the number of board

members who need to attend as well

as how far away the event will be.

To help project outlays for your

board’s upcoming budget year, here

are some typical costs for various

types of programs gleaned from mem-

bers of IASB staff and current regis-

tration materials:

Mandatory training

Board members elected or

appointed after June 13, 2011, must

complete the legal and financial train-

ing referenced above within the first

year of their board service. Beginning

April 9, 2013, during this coming bud-

get year, anyone — new or incum-

bent — elected to the board on or

after that date, will need to complete

that training.

IASB has developed an online

course that will fulfill this require-

ment. Cost for the four-hour module

is $50 for members. By completing

the requirement online, the district

saves money on transportation to a

different location to take the train-

ing.

The mandated Open Meetings

Act (OMA) training is for all public

officials in Illinois, including school

board members. While an online

course is offered through the Illinois

Attorney General’s website, IASB

also offers options that are designed

with school board members in mind.

OMA training will again be offered

at this year’s Joint Annual Confer-

ence in Chicago. An additional one-

time charge of $25 covers the

paperwork and certification. IASB’s

“The Basics of Law on Board Meet-

ings and Practices” workshop also

contains everything needed for OMA

certification, in addition to more in-

depth training. Cost of that work-

shop is $125.

An additional requirement for

mandatory training around Illinois’

Performance Evaluation Reform Act

(PERA) will be phased in over the

next five years. Most districts will

not be required to participate in the

teacher evaluation piece until the

2016-17 school year. This Act will

require that board members who will

vote on dismissal of teachers based

on performance evaluations will have

to be “PERA trained” in order to

do so.

Once the Illinois State Board of

Education has developed the imple-

mentation rules, IASB will develop

training — most likely online — that

will allow board members to fulfill

this mandated requirement.

Division meetings

For the semi-annual dinner meet-

ings held each spring and fall, costs

will differ depending on whether the

event is scheduled at a school (which

is typical for most divisions outside

of the Chicago metropolitan area) or

at a restaurant. Registration normally

Linda Dawson is

IASB director/

editorial services

and editor of The

Illinois School

Board Journal.

Typical costs canhelp boards budget

by Linda Dawson


includes dinner as well as meeting

programming.

Division meetings held at restau-

rants will run about $40 per per-

son. Those held at a school will be

about $23 per person.

If your district pays the state rate

of 55½ cents per mile, the cost of dri-

ving round trip to a meeting 50 miles

away would add another $55.50.

That would make the dinner meet-

ing a total of $78.50 to $95.50 per

board member traveling alone. If

board members share transportation

… a driver with three passengers …

then total district cost for the meet-

ing would run $147.50 to $175.50.

Some divisions schedule sum-

mer and winter governing meetings,

where board members can help divi-

sion officers and IASB field services

staff determine programming needs

for the fall and spring meetings, as

well as get updates on other Associ-

ation events. Cost to attend these

meetings, which are usually smaller

and held at a restaurant, will be sim-

ilar to those for a fall or spring meet-

ing or less.

This spring, division meetings

also included an option for manda-

tory OMA training. The special pro-

gramming added $25 to the cost of

attendance, but allowed board mem-

bers to attend two function at once

instead of separately, which would

save on mileage reimbursement and

travel time.

Workshops

Cost of stand-alone workshops

can vary widely, depending on the

topic and the speakers, but gener-

ally cost between $125 and $185 per

person for most registrations. Mileage

to and from the event will also need

to be calculated at 55½ cents per mile.

If the workshop plus driving time

runs several hours, it may require

an overnight stay the night before to

make an early-morning meeting.

With meals, add about $200 for stay-

ing overnight in a small city, or $300

in a large metropolitan area. Typical

total: from $200 for a drive-in work-

shop and up to $450 for an

overnighter.

The Association often discounts

registration if more than one session

is being held at the same time. Even

though the cost may be more initially,

it might make more sense to attend

both workshops at a discounted price

and only pay one mileage and/or

overnight stay with extra meals.

IASB also offers a number of

in-district workshops to help boards

save on travel and registration costs.

Having an in-district workshop brought

to your board allows all board mem-

bers to hear the same message at once

for one cost.

Information about board mem-

ber training and programs such as

the LeaderShop Academy are avail-

able on IASB’s website at http://iasb.

com/training/events.cfm. IASB also

has developed a board training cal-

endar available at http://iasb.com/train-

ing/bdcal.cfm

Joint Annual Conference

Costs associated with Novem-

ber’s conference in Chicago will vary

differently for districts, depending

on how far they are from the “big

city.” The district will need to bud-

get at least $360 per person for reg-

istration, plus about $225 or more

per day for lodging and meals. Hotel

rates have been negotiated years in

advance and are much lower than

most discounted rates charged for

staying in downtown Chicago.

What the district authorizes

for meals per day can range from $40

to covering actual expenses. The

amount should be established by pol-

icy at a board meeting prior to con-

ference registration and attendance,

not when the receipts are being turned

in for payment.

Travel options also vary because

board members may elect to take the

train instead of driving into the city.

As a guide, an Amtrak ticket from

Springfield to Chicago costs about

$50 round trip. Board members trav-

eling from a city that does not have

an Amtrak station would have to fig-

ure in mileage to get to the station

and back home as well.

Board members traveling by train

also will need to take a taxi to the

hotel, which will add another $15 to

$20.

In addition to mileage, board

members who drive will need to add

about $30 to $50 or more per night

for parking.

Other add-ons for annual con-

ference might include attending a

The Association often discounts regis-

tration if more than one session is

being held at the same time. Even

though the cost may be more initially,

it might make more sense to attend

both workshops at a discounted price

and only pay one mileage and/or

overnight stay with extra meals.


5th Biennial LeaderShopSymposium

June 16, 2012Lombard, IL

How You as a LeaderCan Thrivein Adversity

Presenter

Diane Reed, Ed.D.Co-Director and Associate Professor

in Educational Leadership, former superintendent and author of

Resilient Leadership for Turbulent Times

S A V E T H E D A T E

“I believeresilience is

the single mostimportant quality in a leader.”

Warren Bennis

By InvitationONLY!

Resilience is absolutely necessary for successful

leadership, and for a balancedand satisfying life. Plan now to

attend this exciting learningopportunity designed

exclusively for School BoardLeaderShop Academy members

and their superintendents.

Additional information and registration details will follow in early spring.

preconference workshop ($220, which

includes breakfast and lunch for all-

day workshops) or taking the Chica-

go Schools Tour ($85, which includes

breakfast).

The average bill for one board

member attending typically ranges

from $1,150 to $1,400, with addi-

tional costs for those board members

traveling from southern Illinois.

National conventions

Some districts also choose to

send representatives to the Nation-

al School Boards Association Con-

ference or NSBA’s Federal Relations

Network lobbying conference. Some

costs will be similar, but others will

be much more.

Plan to spend $900 for the annu-

al conference and $685 for the FRN

conference just in registration fees.

As with Illinois’ annual conference,

board members can choose to add

a pre-conference workshop at an addi-

tional cost of $195 for a half-day and

$320 for a full day. NSBA also offers

various site visits on each day of the

conference for $105 to $160, depend-

ing on the site.

Obviously travel expense will be

more as the locations are out of state.

Airline tickets vary in price depend-

ing on the location and whether your

board members are leaving from major

hub airports like O’Hare in Chicago

or Lambert in St. Louis, or from a

regional airport, such as Blooming-

ton or Springfield. Budget at least

$250 to $350 for airline tickets and

remember to allow extra for mileage

to and from the airport.

FRN is always held in Wash-

ington, D.C. NSBA’s annual confer-

ence for 2013 will be in San Diego;

2014 is scheduled for New Orleans.

Cost of hotel rooms for those con-

ferences can run anywhere from $190

to $250 per night, depending on the

location. Meal costs for national con-

ference should also be part of your

board policy that covers meals at the

JAC.

As you can see from the above,

professional development for board

members is an added expense for a

district. Creating a line item in the

budget is a good way to ensure that

board members get mandated train-

ing, as well as allowing for expenses

for other training opportunities.

The board may want the super-

intendent to provide figures on how

much the district spends on profes-

sional development for teachers and

staff and then look at the line item

for both that training and board mem-

ber training as a percentage of the

district budget.

Remember, however, that the

cost of not having board members

who are well-trained and well-

informed on the current issue affect-

ing education may be even more

costly.

P R A C T I C A L P R

With demands of increased

accountability and trans-

parency from school districts, it is

imperative that school board mem-

bers understand the importance of

strategic communication.

A planned and systematic com-

munication program helps improve

the programs and services of a school

district. And, that adds up to under-

standing of the role and needs of the

school district, better understanding

of public attitudes, shaping of poli-

cies in the public interest, and imple-

menting involvement and information

activities that earn public support.

Local community members need

to understand the school district’s

successes and challenges and how

they can support the education of

every student.

The National School Public Rela-

tions Association (NSPRA) and its

Illinois chapter, INSPRA, are designed

to help school board members, admin-

istrators and school communication

professionals strategically prob-

lem-solve to gain community under-

standing and support, and ultimately

student success.

School board members should

rely on a trained professional to man-

age communication strategies that

are proactive and that allow the board

and district to be active players in

the community.

A great way to learn about strate-

gic communication is to attend the

National School Public Relations Asso-

ciation Conference that will be held

July 8-11, 2012, in Chicago. At this

59th annual seminar, school board

members, superintendents, princi-

pals and school communication pro-

fessionals from throughout the United

States will gather to share the best,

latest and most effective practices in

school communication. And this con-

ference will be cost-effective since

it’s being held in Illinois!

At the seminar, participants will

come face-to-face with outstanding

experts and practitioners in school

communication and leadership. They

will share their best new ideas, pro-

vide seasoned insights and offer the

tools needed to help schools. More

than 70 sessions will be focused on

developing effective, budget-savvy

and targeted communication pro-

grams, including social media strate-

gies, crisis communication, com -

muni cating budget/finance issues,

building trust and support, commu-

nity engagement and improving media

relations. Tracks are even designed

specifically for superintendents and

principals. Complete details can be

found at www.nspra.org.

The learning possibilities are infi-

nite when school board members join

or encourage personnel in charge of

school communication to join the

Illinois Chapter of NSPRA.

Membership benefits for an orga-

nization that connects communica-

tion professionals across the state

are:

• Participation in an award-winning

professional organization that pro-

vides public relations training,

counseling, information and

inspiration;

• A “Member Needs Help” program,

which allows any INSPRA mem-

ber to seek advice and examples

from members across the state,

and ensures that all members can

benefit from the answers through

an online forum;

• Access to the INSPRA document

library, featuring examples and

templates of forms, brochures and

other resources frequently used

by school PR professionals;

• The opportunity to register for Fri-

day morning seminars (six per year)

featuring experts with practical

strategies for media relations, social

Carla Erdey is

director of

communications

for Consolidated

High School

District 230 in

Orland Park,

Illinois, and

president of the

Illinois Chapter

of the National

School Public

Relations

Association.

Communication networksoffer benefits for districts

by Carla Erdey


Columns aresubmitted bymembers of




Editor’s note: John J Cassel and

Angie Peifer have been among

a select few Association personnel

who answered monthly questions

for the American School Board Jour-

nal. These questions and their

answers are representative of the

knowledge of board issues and cul-

ture that have been shared, and they

are used with that publication’s per-

mission.

The question: A longtime school

board member had suffered from a

debilitating illness and requested that

he be able to participate in school

board meetings remotely, by tele-

phone. His board colleagues gladly

gave him the opportunity. When he

recovered, he began attending meet-

ings in person. Another board mem-

ber wanted the same privilege, but

for a different reason: she lived about

20 miles from the board meeting office.

She was asking for this to be a per-

manent arrangement. What should

the board do?

Angie’s answer: New technolo-

gies have caused many board and

state legislative bodies to reconsider

their definitions of “meeting atten-

dance.” This board should first check

its policy, which should reflect the

board’s thinking about meeting atten-

dance as well as any current state

statutes defining a legally convened

meeting. In Illinois, a quorum of the

board must be physically present

at the meeting and participation by

telephone or audio conferencing is

restricted to 1) personal illness or

disability, 2) employment or district

business, or 3) a family or other emer-

gency. Absent policy or state legal

guidance, this board needs to have a

policy-level conversation about its

expectations for meeting attendance

and participation and then adopt

those expectations as board policy.

The question: A longtime var-

sity basketball coach at an urban high

school had a reputation as an inspir-

ing teacher and a great guy. In the

past five years, however, his team had

a losing record. Some parents and

community members were pressur-

ing the superintendent and the school

board to fire this coach and replace

him with someone who could pro-

duce a winning season. Parents com-

plained that their students were

missing out on scholarship opportu-

nities because of the team’s poor per-

formance. Some school board

members thought this attitude of “win

at any cost” was misguided, and that

the coach put teaching above com-

petition. Other members agreed with

the parents. What should the board

do?

John’s answer: I strongly support

the idea of “the board has one employ-

ee — the superintendent.” That is,

everyone else in the system works

for the superintendent. A wise board

will not want to interject itself into

the relations between the superin-

tendent and his or her staff — in this

instance, the principal and basket-

ball coach.

At the same time, how does the

superintendent know if he or she has

the right employee for this important

part of the school’s athletic program?

Angie Peifer is

IASB associate

executive direc-

tor for board

development

and Targeting

Achievement

through Gover-

nance. John J.

Cassel served as

an IASB field

services director

for 18 years

before retiring in

August 2011.

IASB helps to answergovernance questions

by Angie Peifer and John J. Cassel

This board should

first check its policy,

which should reflect

the board’s thinking

about meeting atten-

dance as well as any

current state statutes

defining a legally

convened meeting.


It depends on what benefits the school

expects to receive from its invest-

ment in basketball. This is the key

board question: What does our com-

munity want from our sports pro-

gram?

The board serves the superin-

tendent — as well as the staff, stu-

dents and community — by providing

an answer to this foundational ques-

tion. The answer is likely some mix

of school reputation, team building

and cooperative learning, charac-

ter development, co-curricular oppor-

tunities and nurturing excellence.

How the board weighs these and oth-

er values can be expected to shape

the work of the coach. Is he the right

person? That’s a superintendent ques-

tion. Is the program working? That’s

a board question, which can only be

answered with helpful policy in place.

The question: A school board in

a small town had a contentious elec-

tion that resulted in a new slate of

board members serving alongside

longtime members. Board relations

started out strained and went down-

hill from there. The board president

decided a board retreat could help

rebuild frayed relationships. The oth-

er board members had one stipula-

tion: They wanted to meet in private,

where they could feel safe to discuss

their conflicts. Retreats in private

clearly violate Sunshine Laws. What

should the board do?

Angie’s answer: The board has

no choice but to work within the

boundaries of their state’s Sunshine

Laws. Although a private retreat might

help repair member relationships, it

would seriously damage the board’s

relationship with the press and its

community. As a possible compro-

mise, the board president might con-

sider contacting the local media outlets

to explain the purpose of the retreat,

providing any relevant information

about the retreat (who will be facil-

itating, etc.), and asking if they would

cooperate by not covering this par-

ticular session. The board might pro-

vide the media with copies of any

board agreements that came out of

this session.

The question: A school board in

a Midwestern town had a great rela-

tionship with its state legislators, one

of whom had previously served on

the board before being elected to state

office. Board members prided them-

selves on being good advocates for

their district and public education

by regularly meeting with state reps

to discuss district and statewide issues.

One new board member, however,

didn’t value the connections to the

state legislature. She believed that

school board members should be

focused only on their districts, and

not get mixed up with politics. Her

insistence was causing friction on the

board, and community members

began to question it, too. What should

the board do?

John’s answer: I like to think

about school board members as com-

munity (not just district) leaders. So,

a board that does not attempt to engage

the wider issues — especially the

state legislature, since they have the

key responsibility for education —

may be defaulting on an important

board function. Of course this is tough

and exasperating stuff — it would be

easier to just focus on local district

issues. Perhaps this particular board

might agree that some of its mem-

bers will be focused internally while

others invest energy externally. In

practice, the two may not be easily

separated. Bottom line: Public schools,

by definition, are “mixed up in pol-

itics” and those who provide board

leadership need to engage the larger

community as this context is part of

the very meaning of public educa-

tion.

The question: A district super-

intendent and administration were

putting an anti-bullying program/cur-

riculum in place for the schools, with

a different program for each age lev-

el: elementary, middle and high school.

The superintendent brought to the

board a proposal that it get involved

in the initiative by leading by exam-

ple. He asked that the board revamp

and reemphasize its civility code and

ethics code, and mention specifical-

ly that bullying behavior among adults

would not be tolerated. Some board

members thought it was a great idea.

A few members, however, were offend-

ed. They thought that being part of

the initiative would suggest that they

were having difficulties getting along.

What should the board do?

John’s answer: The example of

the board always sets the pace for the

district. The board’s influence by

example is often subtle, operating at

the level of culture and expectations.

So, it seems to me the superinten-

dent is appropriately concerned about

alignment — is the whole district,

including the board, on the same

page? Do we have a clear focus and

a commitment toward our common

goals? Boards are wise to make explic-

it the connection between their val-

ues and hopes for the district and the

various programs and activities of the

district, In this instance, the board

should actively and explicitly explore

the connection between its anti-bul-

lying program and its stated values

and goals. Then it should discuss how

its own behavior and modeling sup-

port those same values and goals.


A Directory of your

IASB ServiceAssociates

IASB Service Associates are businesses whichoffer school-related products and services andwhich have earned favorable repu tations for qual-ity and integrity. Only after screening by theService Associates Executive Committee is abusiness firm invited by the IASB Board ofDirectors to become a Service Associate.

Appraisal ServicesINDUSTRIAL APPRAISAL COMPANY — Insurance

appraisals, property control reports. OakwoodTerrace - 630/827-0280

Architects/EngineersALLIED DESIGN CONSULTANTS, INC. —

Architectural programming, site planning & design,architectural and interior design, and constructionadministration. Springfield - 217/522-3355

ARCON ASSOCIATES, INC. — Architectural, con-struction management and roof consulting. Lombard- 630/495-1900; website: http://www.arconassoc.com; e-mail: [email protected]

BAYSINGER DESIGN GROUP, INC. — Architecturaldesign services. Marion - 618/998-8015

BERG ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, LTD. —Consulting engineers. Schaumburg - 847/352-4500;website: http://www.berg-eng.com

BLDD ARCHITECTS, INC. — Architectural and engineering services for schools. Decatur - 217/429-5105; Champaign - 217/356-9606; Bloomington -309/828-5025; Chicago - 312/829-1987; website:http://www.bldd.com; e-mail: [email protected]

BRADLEY & BRADLEY — Architects, engineers andasbestos consultants. Rockford - 815/968-9631; web-site: http://www.bradleyandbradley.net/

CANNON DESIGN — Architects. Chicago - 312/960-8034; website: www.cannondesign.com; e-mail:[email protected]

CM ENGINEERING, INC. — Specializing in ultra effi-cient geo-exchange HVAC engineering solutions forschools, universities and commercial facilities.Columbia, MO - 573/874-9455; website: www.cmeng.com

CORDOGAN CLARK & ASSOCIATES — Architectsand engineers; Aurora - 630/896-4678; website:www.cordoganclark.com; e-mail: [email protected]

DAHLQUIST AND LUTZOW ARCHITECTS, LTD. —Architects and engineers. Elgin - 847/742-4063;Hinsdale - 630/230-0420; website: http://www.dla-ltd.com; e-mail: [email protected]

DESIGN ARCHITECTS, INC. — Architecture, engi-neering, planning and interior design. Hillsboro -217/532-5600; East St. Louis - 618/398-0890; Marion- 618/998-0075; Springfield - 217/787-1199; e-mail:[email protected]

DLR GROUP, INC. — Educational facility design andmaster planning. Chicago - 312/382-9980; website:www.dlrgroup.com; e-mail: [email protected]

ERIKSSON ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, LTD. —Consulting civil engineers and planners. Grayslake -847/223-4804

FANNING/HOWEY ASSOCIATES, INC. — Schoolplanning and design, with a focus on K-12 schools.Park Ridge - 847/292-1039

FGM ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS, INC. — Architects.Oak Brook - 630/574-8300; Peoria - 309/669-0012;Mt. Vernon - 618/242-5620; O’Fallon - 618/624-3364;website: http://www.fgm-inc.com

GRAHAM & HYDE ARCHITECTS, INC. — Architec -tural services. Springfield - 217/787-9380

GREENASSOCIATES, INC. — Architecture/construc-tion services. Deerfield - 847/317-0852, Pewaukee,WI - 262/746-1254; website: www.greenassociates.com; e-mail: [email protected]

GRP MECHANICAL, INC. - Mechanical service andperformance contracting. Bethalto - 618/779-0050

HEALY, BENDER & ASSOCIATES, INC. — Archi -tects/Planners. Naperville, 630/904-4300; website:www.healybender.com; e-mail: [email protected]

HUFF ARCHITECTURAL GROUP, INC. — Architects,engineers, construction managers and school con-sultants. Springfield - 217/698-8250; Champaign -217/352-5887

IMAGE ARCHITECTS, INC. — Architects. Carbondale- 618/457-2128

JH2B ARCHITECTS — Architects. Kankakee - 815/933-5529

KENYON & ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS —Complete architectural services for education. Peoria- 309/674-7121

KJWW ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS — Facilityassessments, infrastructure master planning,acoustical engineering, architectural lighting, con-struction administration, systems commissioning.Naperville - 630/753-8500

LEGAT ARCHITECTS, INC. — Architects. Chicago -312/258-1555; Oak Brook - 630/990-3535; Wauke -gan - 847/263-3535; Crystal Lake - 815/477-4545

LZT ASSOCIATES, INC./LARSON & DARBY GROUPArchitecture, planning, engineering. Peoria - 309/673-3100; Rockford - 815/484/0739; St. Charles, MO -630/444-2112; webite: www.larsondarby.com; e-mail:[email protected]

MECHANICAL SERVICES ASSOCIATES CORP. —HVAC, plumbing and electrical design. Crystal Lake -815/788-8901

MELOTTE-MORSE-LEONATTI, LTD — Architectural,industrial, hygiene and environmental service.Springfield - 217/789-9515

PCM+D — Provide a full range of architectural ser-vices including facility and feasibility studies, architec-tural design construction, consulting and related ser-vices. East Peoria - 309/694-5012

PERKINS+WILL — Architects; Chicago - 312/755-0770; website: www.perkinswill.com; e-mail: [email protected]

PSA-DEWBERRY — Architects, planners, landscapearchitecture and engineers. Peoria - 309/282-8000;Chicago - 312/660-8800; Elgin - 847/695-5480; web-site: www.dewberry.com

RICHARD L. JOHNSON ASSOCIATES, INC. —Architecture, educational planning. Rockford -815/398-1231

RUCKPATE ARCHITECTURE — Architects, engi-neers, interior design. Barrington - 847/381-2946;website: http://www.ruckpate.com; e-mail: [email protected]

SARTI ARCHITECTURAL GROUP, INC. —Architecture, engineering, life safety consulting, inte-rior design and asbestos consultants. Springfield -217/585-9111; e-mail: [email protected]

WIGHT & COMPANY — An integrated services firmwith solutions for the built environment. Darien -630/696-7000; website: http://www.wightco.com; e-mail: [email protected]

WM. B. ITTNER, INC. — Full service architectural firmserving the educational community since 1899;.Fairview Heights - 618/624-2080; website: http://www.ittnerarchitects.com; e-mail: [email protected]

WRIGHT & ASSOCIATES, INC. — Architecture andconstruction management. Metamora - 309/367-2924

Building ConstructionBOVIS LEND LEASE — Construction Man -

agement/Program Management. Contact JohnDoherty. Chicago - 312/245-1393; website: www.bovislendlease.com; e-mail: [email protected]

CORE CONSTRUCTION — Professional constructionmanagement, design-build and general contractingservices. Morton - 309/266-9768; website: www.COREconstruct.com

FREDERICK QUINN CORPORATION — Constructionmanagement and general contracting. Addison -630/628-8500; webite: www.fquinncorp.com

HOLLAND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, INC. — Fullservice Construction Management and GeneralContracting firm specializing in education facilities.Swansea - 618/277-8870

MANGIERI COMPANIES, INC. — Construction man-agement and general contractor capabilities. Peoria -309/688-6845

POETTKER CONSTRUCTION — Construction man-agement, design/build and general contracting ser-vices. Hillsboro - 217/532-2507

PROFESSIONAL CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT,INC. — Construction management. Mundelein - 847/382-3680

S.M. WILSON & CO. — Provides construction man-agement and general construction services to educa-tion, healthcare, commercial, retail and industrialclients. St. Louis, MO - 314/645-9595

THE GEORGE SOLLITT CONSTRUCTION COM - PANY — Full-service construction managementgeneral contractor with a primary focus on educa-tional facilities. Wood Dale - 630/860-7333; website:www.sollitt.com; e-mail: [email protected]

TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY —Referendum assistance, conceptual and masterplanning, budget assistance or verification, partici-pant in panels, construction management and con-sulting. Chicago - 312/327-2860; website: http://www.turnerconstruction.com; e-mail: [email protected]

Practical PR continued from page 35

Computer SoftwareSOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY, INC. — Administrative

Software. Tremont - 888/776-3897; website: http://www.sti-k12.com; e-mail: [email protected]

Environmental ServicesALPHA CONTROLS & SERVICES, LLC — Facility

Management Systems, Automatic Temperature Con- -trols, Access Control Systems, Energy Saving Solu -tions; Sales, Engineering, Installation, Commis -sioning and Service. Rockford - 815-227-4000; Peoria- 309-688-7411; Springfield - 217-529-3111; Toll-Free- 866-ALPHA-01

CTS-CONTROL TECHNOLOGY & SOLUTIONS —Performance contracting, facility improvements and energy conservation projects. St. Louis, MO -636/ 230-0843; Chicago - 773/633-0691; website:www.thectsgroup.com; e-mail: [email protected]

ENERGY SYSTEMS GROUP — A comprehensiveenergy services and performance contracting com-pany providing energy, facility and financial solutions.Itasca - 630/773-7203

HONEYWELL, INC. — Controls, maintenance, energymanagement, performance contracting and security.St. Louis, Mo – 314/548-4136,Arlington Heights -847/797-4954; e-mail: [email protected]

IDEAL ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, INC. —Asbestos and environmental services. Bloomington -309/828-4259

MECHANICAL INCORPORATED — New construc-tion, renovation, comprehensive and basic preventa-tive maintenance service contracts. Freeport - 815/235-1955; Hillside - 708/449-8080; Rockford - 815/398-1973; Fox Lake - 847/973-1123; website: www.mechinc.com; e-mail: [email protected]

OCCUPATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTHSOLUTIONS, INC. (OEHS) — Industrial hygiene,microbiological evaluations and ergonomics.Chatham - 217/483-9296

RADON DETECTION SPECIALISTS — Commercialradon surveys. Burr Ridge - 800/244-4242; website:www.radondetection.net; e-mail: [email protected]

RCM LABORATORIES, INC. — Environmental, healthand safety services. Countryside - 708/485-8600

SECURITY ALARM SYSTEMS — Burglar and firealarms, video camera systems, door access systems,door locking systems, and alarm monitoring. Salem -618/548-5768

Financial ServicesBERNARDI SECURITIES, INC. — Public finance con-

sulting, bond issue services and referendum support.Fairview Heights - 618/206-4180; Chicago - 800/367-8757

BMO CAPITAL MARKETS/GKST, Inc. — Full servicebroker/dealer specializing in debt securities, includingmunicipal bonds, U.S. Treasury debt, agencies, andmortgage-backed securities. Chicago - 312/441-2601; website: www.bmo.com/industry/uspublicfi-nance/default.aspx; e-mail: [email protected]

EHLERS & ASSOCIATES — School bond issues; ref-erendum help; financial and enrollment studies. Lisle- 630/271-3330; website: http://www.ehlers-inc.com;e-mail: [email protected]

FIRST MIDSTATE, INC. — Bond issue consultants.Bloomington - 309/829-3311; e-mail: [email protected]

GORENZ AND ASSOCIATES, LTD. — Auditing andfinancial consulting. Peoria - 309/685-7621; website:http://www.gorenzcpa.com; e-mail: [email protected]

HUTCHINSON, SHOCKEY, ERLEY & COMPANY —Debt issuance, referendum planning, financial assis-tance. Chicago - 312/443-1566; website: www.hse-muni.com; e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]

RAYMOND JAMES & ASSOCIATES, INC. — Full ser-vice Investment Banking firm. Chicago - 312/612-7814

ROBERT W. BAIRD & CO. INC. — Financial consult-ing; debt issuance specialist; bond underwriting; ref-erendum assistance. St. Charles - 630-584-4994;website: www.rwbaird.com; e-mail: [email protected]

SPEER FINANCIAL, INC. — Financial planning andbond issue services. Chicago - 312/346-3700; website: http://www.speerfinancial.com; e-mail:[email protected]

STIFEL, NICOLAUS & COMPANY, INC. — Full ser-vice securities firm providing investment banking andadvisory services including strategic financial plan-ning; bond underwriting; and referendum and legisla-tive assistance - Edwardsville - 800/230-5151; e-mail:[email protected]

WILLIAM BLAIR & COMPANY — Bond issuance,financial advisory services. Chicago - 312/364-8955; e-mail: [email protected]

Human Resource ConsultingBUSHUE HUMAN RESOURCES, INC. — Human

resource, safety and risk management, insurance consulting. Effingham - 217/342-3042; website: http://www.bushuehr.com; e-mail: [email protected]

InsuranceHINZ CLAIM MANAGEMENT, INC. — Third party

administrator for workers comp and insurance claims.Chicago - 800/654-9504

Superintendent SearchesHAZARD, YOUNG, ATTEA & ASSOCIATES, LTD —

Superintendent searches, board and superintendentworkshops. Glenview - 847/724-8465

media, community outreach, cri-

sis communications, publication

design, strategic planning, staff and

labor issues, referenda, business

partnerships and other “hot topics”;

• Networking with top school PR pro-

fessionals, including the opportu-

nity for professionals relatively

new to school PR to be mentored

by a more veteran professional;

• Proactive insight into emerging

education issues and trends;

• Expert feedback and special recog-

nition for education publications

and programs through the annual

Communications Contest and Gold-

en Achievement Awards;

• Opportunities to provide state-lev-

el special recognition of staff, board

and community members who go

the extra mile for your district,

through the annual Distinguished

Service Awards;

• Linkage with NSPRA and insight

into national trends and issues.

School board members can also

follow INSPRA on Facebook, Twitter

and LinkedIn to learn about trends

in school communication and gath-

er the latest INSPRA news. Get con-

nected at www.inspra.org.

Both NSPRA and INSPRA can

help a school board member under-

stand the important role of com-

munication and then support the per-

sonnel charged with this manage-

ment function. Most districts have

trained personnel to manage the teach-

ing and learning, human resources

and business functions. It only makes

sense to have someone specialized

in managing the strategic communi-

cation function of the organization.

It could be said that the ultimate

equation for a school district is:

Teaching + Learning + Highly

Qualified Personnel + Financial

Resources = Student Success with a

common denominator of an informed

and supportive community through

strategic communication.


Constance R.

Collins, superintendent

of Round Lake CUSD

116, and Sheila Harri-

son-Williams, superin-

tendent of Hazel Crest

SD 152.5, were hon-

ored with the 2012 Dr.

Effie H. Jones Human-

itarian Award during

the American Associa-

tion of School Admin-

istrators (AASA)

National Conference

on Education in Hous-

ton. Harrison-Williams and Collins won

the award for jointly creating programs

to support aspiring superintendents.

They developed and for eight years have

voluntarily convened an annual one-

day workshop to address the barriers

women and minorities face in seeking

the superintendency, identifying strate-

gies to overcome the barriers. In 2011,

Harrison-Williams and Collins also

received corporate funding and coor-

dinated a three-day Aspiring Superin-

tendents Summer Institute designed

to provide in-depth leadership prepa-

ration for women and minorities.

Mary Ann Manos

is among 22 finalists

nationwide for the

AASA’s Outstanding

Women in School Lead-

ership Award for 2012.

The award pays tribute to the talent,

creativity and vision of outstanding

female administrators in the nation’s

public schools. Candidates are judged

on: leadership for learning; communi-

cation; professionalism; and commu-

nity involvement. Manos was recog-

nized for her exceptional leadership of

Hartsburg-Emden CUSD 21.

In memoriamPaul E. Bertsche,

83, Flanagan, died Feb-

ruary 7, 2012. He served

on the former Flanagan

CUSD 4 board of edu-

cation for more than 14

years. He also served on the McLean,

Livingston and DeWitt Regional School

Board. He was a lifelong farmer in the

Flanagan area and a director of the State

Bank of Graymont from 1971 to 2008.

Kenneth Brown,

89, Aledo, died Febru-

ary 3, 2012. He had

served on the school

board for the former

Aledo CUSD 201. Brown

farmed his entire life in the Sunbeam

area in Mercer County. He also served

on the Mer-Roc Farm Service board,

was an Ohio Grove Township supervi-

sor and an active member of the Aledo

Rotary Club.

Kenneth J. Duna-

hee, 81, Lexington, died

February 25, 2012. He

was a past member of

the Lexington CUSD 7

school board. A lifelong

farmer in the Colfax, Lexington and

Chenoa areas, Dunahee was a gradu-

ate of Chenoa High School, later serv-

ing in the U.S. Army in Germany in the

1950s. He was a member of the Lex-

ington American Legion.

Donald Eaton, 73, Bethalto, died

March 10, 2012. He had served on

the Bethalto CUSD 8 school board for

10 years. He graduated from Bethalto’s

Civic Memorial High School, where he

still holds several CM sports records.

He retired in March 2000 from the Olin

Corporation, where he had worked as

a stock supervisor for 31 years.

Gale M. Gallagher,

54, Homewood, died

March 7, 2012. She was

a long-standing school

board member for

Homewood SD 153 and

a board member on the Homewood-

Flossmoor High School Foundation. A

homemaker and mother of four, she was

an active volunteer and an advocate for

public schools in general, and early

childhood education in particular.

Eddis E. Hassel-

man, 99, Pekin, died

March 14, 2012. She

was a member of the

Pekin SD 108 school

board for nine years.

She was a 60-year member of Tazewell

County Homemakers Extension Asso-

ciation and served on its county board.

Hasselman also served as an election

judge in Pekin for many years, and was

a former leader of 4-H clubs, Girl Scouts

and Cub Scouts.

Walter L. Helm, 67, Springfield,

died February 6, 2012. He served on

the Cerro Gordo CUSD 100 board from

1979 to 1991. He was a teacher and

Milestones


Milestones


Collins

Harrison-Williams

Question: Why is it important

for me as a school board mem-

ber to pay attention to legislation and

contact my legislator?

Answer: In the current two-year

legislative cycle, more than 10,000

bills were introduced in the Illinois

legislature. Typically, anywhere from

one quarter to a third of all legisla-

tion will either directly or indirectly

affect a local school district. Of course,

not all of these bills pass and become

law, but in the first year of the cur-

rent General Assembly, 680 bills have

been enacted into law. Again, a sig-

nificant percentage of these new laws

will require changes to how a local

school district operates.

Some changes will be relatively

minor, requiring a school board to

adopt a policy on student athlete con-

cussions or to post personnel salary

information on the district’s website.

Other requirements may be more

substantial, such as overhauling the

system for dismissing and RIFing

teachers or requiring school board

members to receive four hours of

training in education labor law and

financial oversight.

For better or for worse, the state

legislature has become much more

involved in the day-to-day activities

of the local school district, and school

board members should become more

aware of the process.

Advocacy by IASB can make a

difference at the Capitol. With 10,000

bills being considered in the legis-

lature, lawmakers cannot and do not

know the effects of all of the pro-

posals. Simply sharing with legisla-

tors what the result would be for

your school district if a bill would

be enacted can change the vote of a

senator or representative. It’s not

arm-twisting, it is merely providing

honest information on the reper-

cussions of a legislative proposal. No

one is more qualified to reach out

to that local legislator than a school

board member who: 1) knows inti-

mately how a proposal would affect

the school district, and 2) has been

elected by the same voters as has

the legislator.

IASB has legislative specialists

who are in the Capitol on every ses-

sion day. These professionals have

analyzed the legislation, have tak-

en a position on the bills as directed

by Association members through the

resolutions and delegate assembly

process, and have relayed those posi-

tions to the lawmakers — again by

providing honest information and

data on the issue. The IASB legisla-

tive team is respected and trusted in

the Capitol, and legislators know that

they are receiving reliable informa-

tion. But when legislators receive

information from their local area,

from their school districts, from their

peers and constituents, that message

is reinforced exponentially!

Last year when the governor pro-

posed the forced consolidation of

school districts based on arbitrary

enrollment and population numbers,

IASB came out in strong opposition.

But it was not IASB staff lobbyists

who killed the proposal. It was the

hundreds of phone calls legislators

received from volunteer, elected school

board members.

Involvement by school board

members in the legislative process

can, and does, make a difference.

IASB legislative staff, with the help

of grassroots support from locally

elected school board members, derail

or amend dozens of bills each year

that could have had a detrimental

effect on local school districts.

All of the information necessary

to keep abreast of the current goings-

on at the Capitol can be found in the

Alliance Legislative Report. The Illi-

nois Statewide School Management

Alliance is the organized legislative

efforts of the Illinois Association of

School Boards (IASB), the Illinois

Association of School Administrators

(IASA), the Illinois Principals’ Asso-

Ben Schwarm,

IASB associate

executive direc-

tor for govern-

mental relations,

answers the

question for this

issue.

Board member advocacycan make a big difference

by Ben Schwarm

A S K T H E S T A F F


2921 Baker DriveSpringfield, Illinois 62703-5929

Address Service Requested

NON-PROFITPRST STANDARD

US POSTAGE PAIDILLINOIS

ASSOCIATION OFSCHOOL BOARDS

www.iasb.com

“Arithmetic is where the answer

is right and everything is nice and

you can look out of the window and

see the blue sky — or the answer is

wrong and you have to start over and

try again and see how it comes out

this time.”Carl Sandburg, American writer and editor, 1878-1967

“A teacher’s day is half bureau-

cracy, half crisis, half monotony and

one-eighth epiphany. Never mind the

arithmetic.”Susan Ohanian, teacher and freelance writer

“A leader has to be one of two

things: he either has to be a brilliant

visionary himself, a truly creative

strategist, in which case he can do

what he likes and get away with it;

or else he has to be a true empow-

erer who can bring out the best in

others.”Henry Mintzberg, Cleghorn Professor of Management Studies, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

“Better public support for pub-

lic schools is possible, but it requires

courageous leadership and a strate-

gic approach that views communi-

cations as a never-ending campaign.”Nora Carr, “Positive Impressions,” Ameri-can School Board Journal, January 2012

“When all men think alike, no

one thinks very much.”Walter Lippmann, American writer,reporter and political commentator, 1889-1974

“We contribute best to the process

of governing when we avoid assum-

ing the mantle of the expert, refrain

from disregarding expert advice

because it is expert advice, and stop

trying to manage the public organi-

zation and functions we have been

asked to govern or advise.”Phil Boyle and Del Burns, Preserving the Public in Public Schools, 2012

“The old standby, ‘you have to

know how to do this or you won’t

be able to get on in life’ is no longer

convincing, because students see

technology as a way of getting on in

life without the mental operations it

replaces.”William G. McCallum, “Thinking out of the Box,” April 30, 2001

“My meteoric rise was due to hard work, dedication and yeast.”

The Illinois School Board Journal May/June 2012

Documents

school boardmembers

high school transcripts

high schools

school boards

percentof lowincome

percentof affluent students

times thatmany students

correct rigor