Commitment to quality education - Arizona's top priority

              COMMITMENT TO
QUALITY EDUCATION
TOP PRIORITY
A Report by the Commission to Study the Quality of Education in Arizona
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
C. Diane Bishop, Superintendent
July 1987
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
H C. Diane Bishop, Superintendent
STATE BOARD OF
VOCATIONAL EDUCATION
Ray Borane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . President
Karin Kirksey Zander . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vice President
Honorable C. Diane Bishop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Executive Officer
Dr. Reginald E. Barr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .M ember
Eddie Basha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member
Betty Inman Lee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member
Dr. J. Russell Nelson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member
David B. Silva . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .M ember
Ada Thomas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Member
The Arizona Department of Education is an equal
opportunity employer and educational agency and
affirms that it does not discriminate on the basis
of race, color, national origin, age, sex, or handi-capping
condition.
Printed in Phoenix, Arizona
by the
Arizona Department of Education
Total Copies Printed . . 300
Total Printing Cost . . . $1,140
Unit Printing Cost . . . $3.80
Date of Printing . . . . 7/87
Report to the Arizona Board of Education
from
The Commission to Study the Quality of Education in Arizona
July, 1987
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Commission to Study the Quality of Education in Arizona was appointed by the Arizona
Board of Education in late spring of 1986 in response to concerns regarding Arizona educa-tion.
Composed of 18 members, lay and educators, the Commission was chaired by C. Diane
Bishop, State Board member and current State Superintendent of Instruction.
PROCEDURES
As the Commission began its work, it reviewed various national and state reports, and
Commission staff collected requested information from school districts, universities and
commercial data bases. As its first official actions, the Commission developed and adopted a
statement of quality education and a description of an educated person resulting from a
quality education.
The Commission then divided itself into six subcommittees, to which other non-Commission
resource members were added. These subcommittees were: Kindergarten Through Grade Five,
Middle Level Education, High School, Language Minority, Exceptional Students, and Dropout
Prevention. After a series of meetings to review information, conduct interviews and discuss
related information and issues, the subcommittees each formed recommendations and con-structed
a report to the Commission.
Subcommittee reports were reviewed by the full Commission, and upon reflection over those
reports, the Commission formulated a series of general recommendations to the State Board
and staff formulated a draft report for later approval by the Commission. It was also agreed
that subcommittee recommendations would stand as more specific recommendations to the
State Board.
STATEMENTS OF QUALITY EDUCATION
As a result of their deliberations, Commission members described a quality education as one
which:
Educates all the children so that each one can realize hislher potential and
can become an optimally contributing member in a changing, democratic
society . . .
An educated person, then, is one who is literate, motivated, responsible, economically self-sufficient,
creative, empathetic, ethical, moral, can take risks, solve problems and make
decisions, and is a good citizen.
STATUS OF CURRENT EDUCATION IN ARIZONA
Comprehensive data on the status of elementary and secondary education in Arizona were
not available, nor was there time or resources to do the type of in-depth data collection
necessary. Thus, the Commission was unable to reach any definitive conclusions about the
quality of Arizona education. However, limited and selected data collection by Commission
members, analysis of available State records and the personal expertise and knowledge of
Commission (and subcommittee) members all contributed to a cursory view of Arizona
education.
According to this view, several observations can be made. Great variation exists in both the
quality of education and efforts to improve the quality of education across the State; those
educators who are involved in improvement efforts need to be both recognized and supported.
Results of mandated achievement tests suggest that Arizona pupils achieve at or above the
national norming average in nine of the twelve grade levels in reading and at or above the
national average in language (grammar) and mathematics; results are considerably poorer for
language minority students. Given the general relationship to economic status and projected
increases in language minority students, it appears that the educational system must get better
just to stay the same in overall quality. hleeting minimum State requirements seems to be a
consistent pattern among districts, and some are making little attempt to exceed these. Grade
configurations for Arizona schools are traditional, with few local and no State Board policies
on middle level education. Teacher preparation in Arizona universities meet or exceed State
guidelines. Considerable differences exist in graduation requirements, attendance requirements,
dropout prevention programs, resource availability and allocation, use and availability of
technology, and priorities across school districts; these may translate into discrepancies in
educational program quality.
With regard to these observations, it seems apparent that Arizona schools and school districts
need to address and receive incentives for addressing policies, practices a.nd curricula that
promise to improve the quality of Arizona education.
FRAMEWORK FOR A QUALITY EDUCATION IN ARIZONA
Based upon the premise that all children are entitled to an education that provides them
maximal opportunity to realize their potential, the Commission asserted a number of state-ments
laying out some of the parameters for a quality education:
provides for excellence and equity
produces highly literate graduates
meets students' needs
is guided by long- and short-range plans
and a district philosophy
provides access to appropriate and
ongoing evaluations
incorporates developmentally appropriate provides for language and cultural dif-curriculum
and methodologies ferences among students
maintains effective retention and dropout seeks to identify/solve emerging
prevention programs problems
actively seeks involvement and support of adequately funds educational programs
parents and community/business groups
fosters accountability related to a
focuses on student rather than subjects quality education
COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
THE MAJOR RECOMMENDATION IS TO MAKE QUALITY EDUCATION THE TOP
PRIORITY OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA.
The Commission recommends that the Arizona Board of Edcation:
1. Develop an ongoing, five-year, long-range plan for education in Arizona, consistent with
the definition of quality education AND OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS IN THIS
REPORT.
2. Make all policy decisions affecting education in the State of Arizona based on, and
in direct support of, the stated framework for a quality educational system and ensure
adequate resources and funding for implementation.
3. Empower the Arizona Department of Education, in concert with other education
organizations, to provide staffdevelopment programs for teachers, administrators, and
school board members.
4. Serve as facilitator to unify various teacherdevelopment efforts in the ~lniversities,
school districts, the Arizona Department of Education, professional associations, and
other organizations.
5. Charge and provide support for the Arizona Department of Education to implement
detailed and systematic data collection on factors consistent with the definition of
quality education in this report.
6. Establish the priority role for the Arizona Department of Education as that of vision
and leadership and grant support for attaining these.
7. Ensure that teachers are provided technological tools and expertise that will empower
them to be more effective and productive.
8. Develop a plan, to raise educators' salaries to a level that is nationally competitive.
The plan should require performance accountability standards for educators.
9. Direct the Arizona Department of Education to evaluate, recognize, and disseminate
information about verifiably excellent programs.
10. Set aside rules (where necessary) to establish incentive systems to encourage optimal
educational practices and responsiveness to present and emerging needs, especially:
a. Voluntary school district consolidation; and
b School district programs for the professionalization of teaching and improving
working conditions of teachers, e.g., establishing a structure to involve teachers
in decision making at the building level.
11. Direct the Arizona Department of Education to undertake a study of the Arts in the K-12
curriculum.
12. Provide a forum for feedback on these recommendations from representative groups
and individuals throughout the State.
13. Actively lobby the State Legislature to develop a funding formula that provides funds
equitably according to needs. THE URGENCY OF THIS RECOMMENDATION IS
CRUCIAL TO IMPLEMENTING THE OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS IN THIS
REPORT.
SPECIFIC SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
Kindergarten Through Grade Five Subcommittee
The achievement of the above goals will require the commitment of teachers, administra-tion,
local governing boards, State Board of Education, and the Legislature. Education
decision makers will:
A. Make all policy decisions affecting education in the State of Arizona based on and in
direct support of the stated quality education goals.
B. Develop curricular activities consistent with the stated goals.
C. Provide technologically advanced productivity aids and teacher assistance to improve
engaged learning time and overall teacher productivity.
D. Aggressively pursue a course of action that provides advanced learning techniques
and tools at classroom level.
E. Produce staff development programs for teachers and administrators to maintain
and refine professional and personal skills to enhance self-esteem and positive
perception of education as a high-quality profession.
F. Provide opportunities for sharing expertise with colleagues throughout the State.
G. Develop a sense of partnership between home, school, community, and Legislature.
H. Work cooperatively with the State colleges of education to provide quality guidance
in the implementation of their curriculum which is consistent with the implementa-tion
of the education goals.
I. Provide programs for parent education and involvement which encourages parents
to assume an active role and ownership of their child's education.
J. Educate and encourage all decision-making bodies, i.e., Legislature and School
Boards, to elevate quality education to a position of the highest priority throughout
the State of Arizona.
K. Provide compensation to professional educators with accountability which is com-parable
to business and industry and would be ranked among the top ten of the
states in the nation. This is essential to attract and retain quality professionals.
L. Move immediately to establish a positive incentive program to encourage voluntary
school district consolidation throughout the State.
M. Disburse tax money collecion in an equitable manner and specifically according to
need across the State.
Middle Level Education Subcommittee
A. It is recommended that the educational system in Arizona be conceptualized as
elementary, middle, and secondary education.
B. It is recommended that the State Board of Education and local governing boards
establish a rationale, philosophy, and policies for middle level schools.
C. It is recommended that the State Board of Education establish guidelines for middle
level education in Arizona that are based upon the characteristics of the transescent
youngster.
D. It is recommended that the Arizona Department of Education establish a facilitator
of middle level education and that the State Board work with the Board of Regents
to ensure at least one Arizona university establish a strong middle level education
teacher preparation program.
E. It is recommended that the State Board of Education join with the National
Association of Secondary School Principals in declaring 1987-1988 as the year of
Middle School Education (in Arizona).
F. It is recommended that the State Board of Education set aside funds for staff
development in Arizona middle level schools.
High School Subcommittee
A. Develop a long-range statewide plan for K-12 education.
B. Adopt a policy statement on the components of a quality high school education
and communicate it to all districts.
C. Establish and maintain a computerized information collection, storage, retrieval, and
dissemination system with relevant educational data and research. Provide a leader-ship
role in technical assistance and support services.
D. Sponsor a Principal's Academy for professional growth and development. Funding
should be shared by the state, the local district, and the university system.
E. Develop and fund a statewide instructional assessment system that focuses on pro-gram
effectiveness and student achievement and outcomes. The system should pro-vide
technical assistance and support services to local school districts.
F. Develop and fund an incentive program for all districts who wish to submit a three-to-
five-year educational plan for the high school program. The plan should contain
philosophy and objectives, program of studies including specified student outcomes,
staff development activities, a comprehensive evaluation and assessment system
employing multiple measures of student achievement and program effectiveness,
funding and budgetary needs, strategies to build partnerships with the community
possibly through a service requirement for all students, a partnership proposal for
collaboration with business and industry, and an alternative instructional program
for "high risk" students.
G. Establish statewide Career Ladder Plan for teachers.
H. Maintain the current number of Carnegie units required for high school graduation.
I. Actively communicate the need for excellence and equity in high school programs.
J. Provide a forum for feedback on these recommendations from representative groups
throughout the state.
Language Minority Subcommittee
The following recommendations are based on a framework for ensuring quality education
for language minority students:
A. That minority cultural and linguistic differences be incorporated into the school
programming.
1. State Board Level:
(a) Recommend policies that accommodate diverse needs of students.
(b) Encourage policies at state and local levels that will enhance the recruit-ment
and certification of language minority teachers and school/district
administrators.
(c) Review existing vocational education curriculum for meeting the needs of
language minority students.
(d) Recommend strengthening of multicultural competencies on the teacher
skills list.
(e) Develop a multicultural strand for the social studies scope and sequence
which focuses not only on Arizona but reaches to a more comprehensive
point of view.
(f) Recommend to Board of Regents that a policy be adopted to help
language minority students get into and through the teacher-preparation
system.
(g) Develop methods to better profile and distinguish among different student
characteristics.
(h) Define programmatic characteristics in a consistent and uniform way.
(i) Define terms and use in a systematic way, e.g., monolingual, bilingual,
limited English proficient. These terms are often used interchangeably in
an incorrect way.
Cj) Expand the bilingual education unit at the ADE in order to monitor,
review, and recommend improvement to the local school district.
vii
2. District Level:
(a) Develop support systems for students such as parent groups, summer
programs, homework.
(b) Provide preservice and in-service training for regular classroom teachers
and support the value and/or teaching of the language and culture of
language minority students to meet varying learning styles.
B. That the minority community be valued and empowered to participate in the
education of language minority students.
1. State Board Level:
Establish a service to coordinate existing resources for language minority
students and their parents.
2. District Level:
(a) Develop support systems for parents (examples are provided above).
(b) Promote involvement of home in educational programming (e.g., reading).
(c) Establish community liaisons.
C. That pedagogy promote intrinsic motivation on the part of students.
1. State Board Level:
(a) Support existing instructional models which empower language minority
students to become active learners.
(b) Recommend that the Legislature adequately fund preservice and in-service
training of teachers/paraprofessionals to receive ESL or Bilingual Endorse-ment
to meet the needs of language minority students.
(c) Recommend that the Legislature fund excess cost of educating language
minority students. This includes monies for planning alternate structures
for delivering instruction and incentives for bilingual/ESL endorsed
teachers.
(d) Provide guidelines to districts for language minority students who transfer
from one district to another.
(e) Establish a system and provide funds for assessing languages, especially
native American languages represented in the state.
(f) Provide resources to the ADE to expand the current system for provision
of appropriate translators and interpreters.
. . .
Vlll
2. District Level:
(a) Ensure that language minority students participate in specific academic
programs (science, mathematics, and technology) that will empower them
to take their place in the social and economic future of this nation.
(b) Develop alternate ways to deliver instruction (time, space, resources, and
staff).
(c) Apply the principles of learning and the concept of good practices to all
children.
(d) Avoid labels which diminish the status of a unique group, e.g., language
deficient.
(e) Implement impact studies resulting in policy statements which forces a
level of awareness and assists in the process of providing quality education
for all students.
(f) Develop programming which enhances self-esteem of language minority
students through successful achievement.
(g) Provide ongoing staff development which assists teachers in acquiring a
repertoire of instructional skills designed to encourage differentiated
delivery systems of instruction.
(h) Use the results of evaluation as a way to adapt the instructional environ-ment
of language minority students rather than to classify these students.
(i) Provide appropriate assessment to avoid overrepresentation of language
minority students in special education programs and underrepresentation
of language minority students in gifted programs.
Exceptional Students Subcommittee
A. Recommendations Involving the Arizona Department of Education
1. Initiate in 1987-88, an impartial, comprehensive study and evaluation of
representative special education and gifted programs, focusing on program
effects and student outcomes, cognitive and affective. Publish results for
possible replication of exemplary programs.
2. Mandate that curricula scope and sequence developed for special education pro-grams
be demonstrably parallel to and congruent with regular education curri-cula
whenever possible unless there is rationale to depart from that curricula.
3. Assess the function of the special education unit and the gifted specialist to
assure that there are enough resources and qualified personnel to provide
appropriate services to LEAS and thus to exceptional students.
4. Establish a research base at ADE to develop long-range studies of efficiency and
effectiveness of programs and assistance to LEAs that want to do their own
studies.
5. Identify a cadre of knowledgeable individuals and establish a process within
ADE's special education and school improvement units to assess scope and
sequence documents, to verify their reality in practice, and to assist in program
writing and implementation.
6. Expand the cadre of professionals within the ADE special education unit to
assist in planning for and developing exceptional student programs, similar to
the School Improvement Unit.
7. Recognize as quality only those programs whose components are verifiable
beyond the written page. When repeated on-site visits validate the reality of
what is claimed by the LEAs, disseminate information for possible replication.
8. Continue to include the Special Education Advisory Committee, along with
LEA representatives and experts in the fields of exceptionalities, in the estab-lishment
of specific and consistent state guidelines for minimum program
standards for all types of exceptional student programs in all state LEAs.
9. Have written and seek a broad acceptance of the recommendations of the
Special Education Advisory Committee and the Standing Committee on Gifted
Concerns to the State Board for rule adoption regarding the criteria for place-ment
in and exit from exceptional student programs.
10. Emphasize the role of the ADE special education unit and gifted specialist in
providing leadership and sharing expertise with LEAS in evaluation and inter-district
articulation. Recommend that additional funds be directed toward
this effort.
11. During the next rule revision regarding certification, add a requirement to the
regular teaching certificate for all teachers at all grade levels of competencies
in the characteristics and needs of exceptional children.
12. Continue to focus on the integration of handicapped children and youth into
regular education and their communities.
B. Recommendations Involving the Universities
1. Urge the universities to include coursework on the characteristics and needs of
exceptional students, curricular modifications, and instructional strategies as
part of the requirements for a degree in education.
2. Encourage universities to include an on-site internship year for all degrees in
the education of exceptional students.
3. Assist the universities in developing a plan for providing coursework and
consultancies to meet LEA staff and program development needs.
C. Recommendations Involving the Legislature
Consider the following for inclusion in the recommendations for legislative action
for the next session:
1. Require school districts to serve preschool handicapped children (ages 3-5) and
continue developmental screening and testing for special needs and gifted
service at the preschool and third grade levels. Some of this is currently in
place, but needs to be augmented.
2. Develop a funding formula that provides the needed resources to provide ser-vice
to all students, including those who cannot be appropriately served in the
regular education program, and take into account the actual rise in educational
expenses to the district, number of students requiring service, remoteness, etc.
3. Establish definitive baseline criteria for placement and exit from LD and EH
programs and other programs as necessary.
4. Encourage a legislative study of the feasibility of implementation of inter-mediate
service agencies (consortia or BOCES) to meet the needs of gifted and
other exceptional students in the State of Arizona.
5. Promote legislation to require in-service training in the needs of all exceptional
students for all school district governing board members.
6. Provide funding for transition activities of handicapped students from school to
the world of work.
Dropout Prevention Subcommit tee
A. Enjoin the legislature to require the appropriate agencies to enforce the compulsory
attendance laws.
B. Encourage the legislature to provide school districts with the option of using either
the 40th day student count, or the 100th day student count in the development of
budget limits for the subsequent budget year.
C. Encourage the Arizona State Board of Education to establish the definition for a
school dropout.
D. Urge the legislature to fully fund the chemical abuse program.
E. Urge the legislature to provide funding for staff development training, focusing on
prevention, to all school district personnel.
F. Recommend to the Arizona State Board of Education to request in the 1987-88
priorities funding for dropout prevention programs from the legislature.
G. Establish a system for the dissemination of successful dropout prevention activities
in the state, southwest, and country.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
I1 . Definition of a Quality Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
I11 . Status of Current Educational System in Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
IV . Characteristics of Children in Arizona Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
V . Framework for a Quality Educational System in Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
VI . Major Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 1
Appendix A .Gr oup Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 3
Kindergarten Through Grade Five . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Middle Level Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Highschool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. 9
Language Minority Students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Exceptional Student (Handicapped and Gifted) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Dropout Prevention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Appendix B .O pinion Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 7
Appendix C .Co mmission Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
xii
THE COMMISSION TO STUDY THE QUALITY OF
EDUCATION IN ARIZONA
REPORT
I. INTRODUCTION
The Commission to Study the Quality of Education in Arizona was formed in the late
spring of 1986 in response to concerns regarding Arizona education. These concerns
surfaced from the High School Graduation Requirements Committee to the State Board.
That Committee recommended that the State Board adopt a definition of quality educa-tion
in Arizona and appoint a State Commission to (1) examine the current quality of
education in Arizona and (2) make recommendations for needed changes and their proba-ble
impact. Consequently, the State Board of Education, acting on the recommmendation
at the May 27, 1986 meeting, established the Commission and approved the list of names
for membership. Additional flames were approved at subsequent meetings for a total of
18 members; C. Diane Bishop, State Board member and currently State Superintendent
of Public Instruction, was named chairperson. The following people served as Commission
members:
Chairperson: Educators:
C. Diane Bishop, Superintendent Dr. Tim Dyer
Arizona Department of Education Phoenix Union High School District
Lay Members:
Bud Bowden
McDonnell Douglas
Paul Brinkmann
Honeywell, Incorporated
Jose Carbajal
Sunnyside School Board
Ken Carpenter
IBM Corporation
Gary L. Cruze
Sperry Corporation
JoAnne Hilde
Prescott School Board
Anita Louise Lichter
Nogales School Board
Jerry A. Oliver
Phoenix Police Department
Adele Verkamp
Flagstaff School Board
Dr. Jon M. Engelhardt
Arizoila State University
Dr. Lola P. Gross
Arizona Department of Education
Dr. Myrtle Gutierrez
Littleton Elementary School District
Dr. Virginia McElyea
Paradise Valley Unified School District
Nina Arias Nelson
Peoria Unified School District
Dr. Stan Paz
Tucson Unified School District
Joan Timeche
Hopi Tribe
Dr. Richard B. Wilson
Amphitheater Unified School District
Dr. Veronica Zepeda
Roosevelt Elementary School District
During the organizational meetings, the Commission defined quality education and
discussed the profile of an educated person who has gone through the public educa-tional
system. Based on that definition and the profile, a quality education model was
developed. (See Figure I.)
During its initial effort, the Commission reviewed the national reports and summaries,
statistical information from the Arizona Department of Education, the Department of
Economic Security, the Department of Public Safety, and the various financial
institutions that publish statistical and demographic data for the state. A staff person
from the Arizona Department of Education was asked to contact the colleges and
universities in the State to ascertain what efforts they were making toward quality that
might impact on public schools; to ask superintendents of school districts in the State
for statements of local board philosophies and policies that address the quality issue, as
well as to identify outstanding, quality programs that are in place already; to conduct a
search through ERIC for definitions of quality and what constitutes a quality education;
to contact state and national professional organizations for the efforts they are making
toward excellence and to collect materials and maintain a file on relevant literature/
research studies on effective schools. All of this information and these materials were
collected and made available to the Commission members. Several publications from
other states that are involved in quality education studies, the reports from U. S. Secre-tary
of Education William Bennett, and the Arizona Department of Education's Effective
Schools Publication were made available as well.
Study teams/subcommittees, composed of Commission members and other individuals
throughout the State invited by them to join the groups, were formed to address differ-ent
areas of concern. Ultimately, six subcommittees reported: Kindergarten through
Grade Five, Middle Level Education, High School, Language Minority, Exceptional
Students, and Dropout Prevention.
Each subcommittee approached the task a little differently; however, in essence, the
charge was to describe the current status of education in Arizona, to develop a frame-work
for a quality education, and to list the recommendations necessary to achieve a
quality education for Arizona students. These groups met periodically throughout the
year to review information, to conduct interviews, and to discuss and assess the informa-tion
and issues. Individual group reports were submitted to the total Commission, but
essentially represent the findings of the specific group. Group reports are included in the
Appendices.
Efforts of the Commission meetings were then directed to reviewing the study team
reports, compiling the list of general recommendations to submit to the State Board of
Education, and approving this report.
11. DEFINITION OF A QUALITY EDUCATION
The following statement of quality education was adopted by the Commission.
The mission of education in Arizona is to educate all the children so
that each one can realize his/her potential and can become an optimally
contributing member in a changing, democratic society.
A quality education is an education that provides maximal opportunities
for all students to realize that potential.
FIGURE I. A QUALITY EDUCATION MODEL
PARTNERSHIPS FOR EDUCATIONAL EXCELLENCE
EDUCATION
DEMOCRATIC
Educators
Government a1
Business and
INDIVIDUALS
English ReadingIWriting Decision-Makers
Mathematics SpeakingIListening Problem Solvers
Science ComputingIMeasuring Risk-Takers
Social Studies Estimating/Hypothesizing Motivated
Foreign Language Computer Skills Responsible
Vocational Education Study Skills/Library Skills Economically Self-sufficient
FinePerforming Arts Thinking SkillslProblem Solving Creative
Health/Physical Social SkillsICreativity Good Citizens
Education Citizenship 3 Empathe tic
HealthISafe ty Ethical
AttitudeISelf-Esteem Moral
111. STATUS OF CURRENT EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM IN ARIZONA
To comprehensively assess the current status of education in Arizona would require
considerable time and the involvement of many different organizations/agencies and
techniques. In-depth surveys and research projects, site visits and extensive interviewing,
comparative studies and evaluations, and complete analyses of data would need to be
included. For this report, an introductory description of the current status of education
in Arizona was predicated on the collected information available to the Commission
members, the expertise and knowledge of the Commission members, and the findings of
the individual study teams.
Currently, school district personnel are meeting minimum requirements in most areas.
Some are making giant progress toward excellence. Others are providing an inadequate
education to students. Efforts are not consistent across the state. In spite of this, many
quality programs and practices exist. Efforts are being made in some districts that are a
vanguard for quality education. Dedicated and competent teachers and administrators
are making concerted and ongoing efforts to effect excellence in our schools. These
efforts are documented by the School Recognition Programs and the Quality Programs
and Practices Review as well as by reports from conference presentations, the Principals'
Academy, and monitoring and other on-site visits. The impact of national reports on what
comprises a quality education is being addressed by taking a realistic look at current
practices, by raising standards, and by developing both long-range and short-range plans
for achieving excellence. School district personnel who are involved in these efforts need
to be recognized and supported for their commitment to public education and to Arizona
students.
Although only one indicator of achievement, test scores of Arizona students reflect both
positive and negative results of schooling. Evaluation, either through standardized testing
or as part of the essential skills program is required of all Arizona schools. Achievement
testing in reading, grammar, and mathematics for grades 1-12 is mandated by the State
Legislature to compare the scores of Arizona pupils with the scores of pupils across the
nation. The Iowa Tests of Basic Skills (ITBS) in grades 1-8, the Stanford Achievement
Test (SAT-7) in grade 9, and the Stanford Test of Academic Skills (TASK) in grades
10-12 were administered in 1987 to a total of 498,23 1 pupils. These pupils were enrolled
in 9 18 schools in 2 10 districts. Certain categories of special education pupils were exempt
by law from taking the tests. There were 6,470 limited English proficient pupils exempt
from the testing as well. Of this group of pupils, 1,107 were exempted for a second year
by 17 districts and 563 were exempted for a third year by 15 districts. (State law allows
pupils who are non-English monolingual or predominantly speakers of a language other
than English to be exempted from the testing requirement for up to three years.) The
total of exempted pupils was less than 1% percent of the total pupils tested.
Arizona pupils achieved at or above the national average in reading in nine of twelve
grade levels. Arizona performance in language (grammar) was at or above the national
average in all grades. Mathematics performance for Arizona pupils was also at or above
the national average in all grades. However, the results are not as favorable when viewed
for students considered language minority. (See report from language minority
subcommit tee.)
Compliance with minimum requirements and state statutes as well as with State Board
rules and regulations is a consistent pattern. Some districts are concerned primarily with
meeting the minimum requirements while others are attempting and succeeding in
TABLE I
ARIZONA PUPIL ACHIEVEMENT TESTING
IOWA TESTS OF BASIC SKILLS-GRADES 1-8
STANFORD ACHIEVEMENT TEST-GRADE 9
STANFORD TEST OF ACADEMIC SKILLS-GRADES 10-1 2
MEAN GRADE EQUIVALENT
APRIL 1986, 1987
TOTAL LANGUAGE (GRAMMAR)
GRADES
TOTAL READING
National Averages
Arizona Averages '86
Arizona Averages '87
TOTAL MATHEMATICS
National Averages
Arizona Averages '86
Arizona Averages '87
1
I GRADES
GRADES
1 ONE I TWO 1 T m E I FOUR 1 I SIX 1 SEVEN / EIGHT 1 NINE 1 TEN 1 ELEVEN / TWELVE
THREE
3.9
3.9
3.8
ONE
1.9
1.8
1.8
SEVEN
7.8
7.6
7.9
National Averages
Arizona Averages '86
Arizona Averages '87
FOUR
4.8
4.7
4.9
TWO
2.9
3 .O
3.0
FIVE
5.9
5.9
6.2
ONE
2.0
2.1
2.2
SIX
6.8
6.6
6.8
FIVE
5.8
5.7
6.0
SIX
6.8
6.9
7.1
THREE
4.0
4.1
4.4
EIGHT
8.6
8.5
8.9
TWO
3 .O
3.4
3.5
1.9
1.9
2.0
FOUR
5 .O
5 .O
5.3
SEVEN
7.8
7.3
7.8
2.9
3 .O
3.1
NINE
9.2
9.6
9.5
EIGHT
8.7
8.3
8.6
ELEVEN
11.2
11.9
12.0
TEN
10.1
10.5
10.5
3.8
3.7
3.8
TWELVE
11.7
12.0
12.4
J
NINE
9.2
10.5
10.2
4.8
4.6
4.8
TEN
10.1
10.9
10.7
5.8
5.8
5.9
ELEVEN
11.6
12.0
12.1
6.8
6.6
6.9
TWELVE
12.3
12.9
PHs
7.8
7.6
7.8
8.6
8.6
8.7
9.9
10.1
10.2
10.7
11.5
11.6
12.0
12.6
12.9
12.4
PHs
PHs
establishing greater accountability for designing programs to meet the needs of their
school populations and communities.
Grade configurations in secondary schools generally conform to traditional patterns of
junior high schools, comprising grades 7-8, and high schools, comprising grades 9-12. In
addition, the single subject departmentalized curriculum design is the norm for both
junior high schools and high schools. Few local school districts have established middle
schools or middle school policies and no related State Board policy exists for middle
schools.
Most secondary teaching personnel are trained in a discipline in their undergraduate
preparation programs and complete a number of education courses and a student teaching
field experience. For teachers in elementary schools, a minor of at least 18 semester hours
in a content area and 45 semester hours in elementary professional preparation, including
student teaching or teaching experience are required. Also, Arizona honors approved
teacher-education programs from regionally accredited colleges and universities. All
teachers in Arizona must have a course in Arizona Constitution, U. S. Constitution,
Reading Decoding, and Reading Practicum, and must pass the Arizona Teacher Profi-ciency
Examination.
Several discrepancies among local districts in length of school day, requirements for
graduation, compulsory attendance, and dropout prevention programs were noted.
Control of educational policies and procedures at the local level is an Arizona tradition.
Thus, there are discrepancies in the quality of the programs provided. Resources and the
allocation of available funds for specific programs vary. Priorities do not always guarantee
equitable attention to effective practices and programs and can result in some programs,
such as those in the area of gifted and learning disabilities, receiving less than adequate
attention in some districts. A lack of standardized criteria for placement in special pro-grams
is partially responsible.
Another area where large discrepancies exist is in that of technology. Although computers
exist in nearly every school in Arizona, the uses of them and the contribution they make
to the total instructional program vary widely. In addition, more sophisticated techno-logical
tools, e.g., interactive video, are being utilized in only a small number of school
districts. An assessment of how to integrate technology into the educational process
needs to be part of every school's curriculum planning.
Arizona schools and districts need to address these deficiencies by devising action plans
to correct them. Resources to meet the needs of all children must be a priority across all
segments of the population. Partnerships that assure local district autonomy within a
State of Arizona framework that encourages and supports instructional improvement
must have the attention and support of all Arizonans to ensure that quality educational
practices, programs, and curriculum designs continue and expand.
IV. CHARACTERISTICS OF CHILDREN IN ARIZONA SCHOOLS
Demographics:
Tables 11, 111, IV,
STATE SUMMARY OF NUMBER AND TYPE OF SCHOOLS
1985-86
Total No. of Districts 21 8 (Does Not Include Accom. Districts, Non-operating or Special Programs) * Teaching High Schools
Total No. of Elem. Schools 759 ** Transporting Districts
Total No. of High Schools 148 *** Non-operating Districts
High Elem. High Total
Elem. Elem. Sch. High Unif. Sch. Sch. Sch. Accom. Spec.
Dist. Sch. Dist. Sch. Dist. Unif. Unif. Unif. Dist. Sch. Prog.
Apache 3 3 0 0 7 2 2 7 29 0 0 0
- --
Cochise 13(**2) 12 2 2 8 24 8 3 2 1 3 I
Coconino 2 2 0 0 6 23 7 3 0 0 0 0
Gila 4(*1) 4 0 1 4 13 4 17 0 0 1
Graham 3(**1) 3 0 0 4 8 4 12 0 0 1
Greenlee 2 2 0 0 3 5 3 8 0 0 1
La Paz 4 4 1 1 1 3 1 4 0 0 0
Maricopa 37 195 6 28 12 135 2 6 161 2 3 1
(*I)
(**I)
Mohave 13(***1) 2 1 1 2 1 6 1 7 0 0 0
Navajo 0 0 0 0 9 30 8 38 0 0 1
- -
Santa Cruz 4(** 1) 3 1 1 2 8 1 9 0 0 0
(*I)
Y avapai 14(**5) 15 1 1 7 15 8 2 3 0 0 0
Yuma 7 2 3 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
State Total 121
SCHOOL DISTRICTS EXISTING/NON-OPERATING ACCOMMODATION DISTRICTS
MOHAVE Mt. Trumbull Elementary No. 24 COCHISE Ft. I-Iuachuca Accommodation No. 00
MARICOPA Horse Mesa Accommodation No. 509
Williams Air Force Base Accommodation No. 5 10
PIMA Zimmerman Accommodation No. 00
PINAL Mary C. O'Brien Accommodation No. 90
ELEMENTARY DISTRICTS TEACHING
HIGH SCHOOL SUBJECTS TRANSPORTING SCHOOL DISTRICTS
GILA Young Elementary No. 5 COCHISE Forrest Elementary No. 81
Rucker Elementary No. 66
GRAHAM Klondyke Elementary No. 9
MOHAVE Topock Elementary No. 12
PIMA Empire Elementary No. 37
Redington Elementary No. 44
SANTA CRUZ Lochiel Elementary No. 9
YAVAPAI Champie Elementary No. 14
Congress Elementary No. 17
Rincon Elenlentdry No. 47
Walnut Grove Elementary No. 7
Williamson Valley Elementary No. 2
TABLE 111
STATE SUMMARY BY GRADE OF PUPIL ENROLLMENT
1985-86
RACIAL ETHNIC
American
White , Black Indian or Pacific Total
(Non- (Non- Alaskan Islander State
I-Iispanic) Hispanic) Hispanic Native or Asian Enrollment Dropouts
Kindergarten 3 1,989 2,205 12,651 3,089 600 50,534 211
Grade One 33,549 2,350 12,763 3,502 613 52,777 3 3
Grade Two 30,4 17 1,889 10,955 2,915 578 46,754 22
Grade Three 29,783 1,816 10,772 2,841 609 45,821 24
Grade Four 27,909 1,682 9,967 2,639 583 42,780 25
Grade Five 27,797 1,658 9,842 2,574 564 42,435 20
Grade Six 27,725 1,686 9,548 2,634 , 598 42,191 32
Grade Seven 29,229 1,820 9,866 2,853 627 44,395 126
Grade Eight 29,990 1,648 9,718 2,694 591 44,641 174
Ungraded Elementary 3,069 457 1,534 481 28 5,569 27
TOTAL
ELEMENTARY 271,457 17,211 97,616 26,222 5,391 417,897 694
Special Education
(Included in above
Total)
Grade Nine 33,866 1,770 10,282 3,949 757 50,624 2,750
Grade Ten 32,692 1,719 8,494 3,171 651 46,727 3,462
Grade Eleven 29,633 1,460 6,809 2,68 1 512 41,095 3,420
Grade Twelve 28,501 1,248 6,078 2,452 505 38,784 2,909
Ungraded Secondary 471 18 113 5 2 2 6 56 121
TOTAL
SECONDARY 125,163 6,215 31,776 12,305 2,427 177,886 12,662
Special Education
(Included in above
Total)
GRAND TOTAL 396,620 23,426 129,392 38,527 7,818 595,783 13,356
Total High School Graduates: 27,533
TABLE VI
NUMBER OF STUDENTS BY CATEGORY /ETHNIC/SEX
CATEGORY TOTAL WHITE BLACK HISPANIC AMER. INDIAN ASIAN CATEGORY
MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE
VH 145 150 99 114 7 6 28 22 9 4 2 4 VH
TMH 762 677 457 362 37 41 198 195 61 7 2 9 7 TMH
EHP
a
HBD
330 52 249 39 39 5 3 2 7 10 1 EHP
156 231 125 165 3 17 19 40 7 8 2 1 HBD
EMH 2,089 1,829 1,069 931 25 1 195 594 530 166 163 9 10 EMH
SPH 12,165 7,373 7,970 4,905 504 271 2,886 1,696 659 412 146 89 SPH
TOT. HAND. 39,673 20,756 25,506 13,021 2,015 1,053 . 9,227 5,072 2,635 1,442 290 168 TOT. HAND.
Taken from Arizona Department of Education Special Education Census, School Year 1986-87.
V. FRAMEWORK FOR A QUALITY EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM IN ARIZONA
Beginning with the premise that all children are entitled to maximal opportunities to
realize their potential, the Commission members developed the following framework:
A Quality Education
* provides for both excellence and equity for all students.
produces graduates with high literacy who are capable of either going on to higher
education or of assuming roles in society as productive, tax-paying, law-abiding
citizens.
* meets each student's intellectual, social, personal, and vocational needs.
incorporates a developmentally appropriate curriculum which is relevant to the lives of
students both today and in the future, including the most advanced research and use of
technology.
e provides for a curriculum taught by interdisciplinary teams with the focus on students
rather than subjects.
* takes its direction from district-specific long- and short-range plans that include phi-losophy
and objectives, programs of study and course content, instructional meth-odologies,
evaluation strategies, staff development, and community involvement.
* utilizes instructional methodologies consistent with the developmental characteristics
of all students served.
provides all students access to proper programs through an unbiased, sound evaluation
system which specifies criteria for entry to and exit from a continuum of services.
* uses an ongoing process of evaluation, review, and revision.
recognizes the differences in language and cultural backgrounds of students and utilizes
these to enhance the opportunities for quality learning.
* provides programs for all students based on a philosophy congruent with the district
philosophy and correlated with the district's total program.
provides prevention programs at all levels to deal effectively with retention and reduce
the ever-growing dropout rate.
goes beyond the school and includes support teams consisting of parents, community
leaders, and business and industry representatives.
* acknowledges and finds solutions for emerging problems.
* provides resources and funding for implementation.
provides an environment which develops and achieves accountability for quality from
all groups involved.
VI. COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
THE MAJOR RECOMMENDATION IS TO MAKE QUALITY EDUCATION THE TOP
PRIORITY OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA.
Toward this end, the following recommendations are submitted to the State Board of
Education for implementation:
1. Develop an ongoing, five-year, long-range plan for education in Arizona, consistent
with the definition of quality education AND OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS IN
THIS REPORT.
2. Make all policy decisions affecting education in the State of Arizona based on, and
in direct support of, the stated framework for a quality educational system and
ensure adequate resources and funding for implementation.
3. Empower the Arizona Department of Education, in concert with other education
organizations, to provide staffdevelopment programs for teachers, administrators,
and school board members.
4. Serve as facilitator to unify various teacherdevelopment efforts in the universities,
school districts, the Arizona Department of Education, professional associations,
and other organizations.
5. Charge and provide support for the Arizona Department of Education to implement
detailed and systematic data collection on factors consistent with the definition of
quality education in this report.
6. Establish the priority role for the Arizona Department of Education as that of vision
and leadership and grant support for attaining these.
7 Ensure that teachers are provided technological tools and expertise that will
empower them to be more effective and productive.
8. Develop a plan, to raise educators' salaries to a level that is nationally competitive.
The plan should require performance accountability standards for educators.
9. Direct the Arizona Department of Education to evaluate, recognize, and disseminate
information about verifiably excellent programs.
10. Set aside rules (where necessary) to establish incentive systems to encourage optimal
educational practices and responsiveness to present and emerging needs, especially:
a. Voluntary school district consolidation; and
b. School district programs for the professionalization of teaching and improving
working conditions of teachers, e.g., establishing a structure to involve teachers
in decision making at the building level.
11. Direct the Arizona Department of Education to undertake a study of the Arts in
the K- 1 2 curriculum.
12. Provide a forum for feedback on these recommendations from representative groups
and individuals throughout the State.
13. Actively lobby the State Legislature to develop a funding formula that provides
funds equitably according to needs. THE URGENCY OF THIS RECOMMENDA-TION
IS CRUCIAL TO IMPLEMENTING THE OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS IN
THIS REPORT.
KINDERGARTEN THROUGH GRADE FIVE SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
I. The Subcommittee
Background
During the 1986-87 school year, the Kindergarten Through Grade Five (K-5) Subcom-mittee
met on a very regular basis approximately once a month and in some cases more
frequently. The group specifically concentrated on the quality of education in kinder-garten
through fifth grade in elementary schools in the public arena. As the review and
discussions evolved, it became more apparent that the quality issues were of a wider
scope than just kindergarten through fifth grade. In fact, the issues are high level policy
related and pertinent to all public education in the kindergarten through twelfth grade
public school system in Arizona. It is widely accepted and was extensively discussed in
this group, however, that the formative years of education, specifically kindergarten
through third grade, were perhaps the most important in setting the skill base foundation
for future growth of the student. It is commonly believed that high school dropouts
actually began the dropout process in the first or second grade when their skill levels
began to lag behind their peer group. Our bottom line overall goal for all education in
Arizona was to graduate at the twelfth grade level a literate individual who had the
capability of either going on to college or filling a position in the work force as a law-abiding,
tax-paying American citizen capable of continuing to learn and change in this
dynamic democratic society in which we live.
Membership
Mr. K. M. Carpenter
IBM Corporation
Dr. Myrtle Gutierrez
Littleton Elementary School District
Dr. Lupe Romero
University of Arizona
Ms. Marilyn Ross
Mesa Public Schools
Ms. Barbara Guyton
Sunnyside Unified District
Charge and Procedure
The specific charge of this subcommittee was to study the current status of quality
education in the K-5 arena to analyze available data, to review and discuss major issues
confronting the achievement of higher quality education, and to make recommendations
for improvement in quality.
11. Definition of Population
The population of students in kindergarten through grade five is composed generally of
students between the ages of five and eleven. Of the approximately 41 8,000 elementary-age
children in Arizona (grades K-8) during the 1985-86 school year, 281,100 were
enrolled in grades kindergarten through grade five. This represents slightly over two-thirds
of all those students attending Arizona public elementary schools.
111. Current Status of K-5 Education in Arizona
Personnel
Teachers in elementary schools are either graduated from an approved teacher-preparation
program or are trained with a minor of at least 18 semester hours in a content
area and 45 semester hours in elementary professional preparation, including student
teaching cjr teaching experience. All Arizona teachers must have courses in Arizona
Constitution, U. S. Constitution, Reading Decoding, and Reading Practicum. In addition,
they must pass the Arizona Teacher Proficiency Examination.
Organizational Structures
The most common grade configuration for elementary students is kindergarten through
grade eight, especially in the less populated areas. Of the 760 elementary schools in
Arizona, nearly 300 use a kindergarten through grade six organization, most prominent
in Maricopa and Pima counties. Other grade configurations include kindergarten through
grade five, kindergarten through grade three, kindergarten through grade four, grade one
through grade six, etc.
Program Con tent
Recognizing the importance of the critical foundation years in a student's education, the
Arizona Legislature passed special legislation to provide academic assistance in kinder-garten
through grade three. School districts were required to develop kindergarten
through grade three improvement plans to supplement the regular education program by
providing special assistance to help students meet the minimum skills necessary for enter-ing
the fourth grade by the end of grade three. In addition, the State Board of Education
adopted a list of essentiallexit skills for kindergarten through grade three as a result of
the legislation.
No specific skills for grades four and five have been identified; however, essentiallexit
skills for grade eight have been determined. By legislation, each district must decide
which skills are appropriate for each grade level promotion.
All children are at different developmental stages and require educational programs
designed to meet their specific needs. Also, issues of experience, culture and language
background need to be considered in designing programs.
Evaluation
Evaluation, either through standardized testing or as part of the essential skills program,
is required of all Arizona schools. Achievement testing in reading, grammar, and mathe-matics
is mandated by the State Legislature. The Iowa Test of Basic Skills is currently
administered to all students, except those who are exempted by law from taking the test,
in grades one through eight.
IV. Framework for Quality K-5 Education
The overall mission of education in Arizona is to educate all children so that each one
can relate to his/her individual potential and become an optimally contributing member
of a changing democratic society. A quality educational system will provide maximal
opportunities for all students to attain excellence. Goals and visions of the K-5 Study
Group for a quality educational process are as follows:
A. The process will produce graduates with high literacy who are capable of either
going on to higher education or assuming roles in society as productive tax-paying,
law-abiding American citizens.
B. The process will provide a quality educational environment which is stimulating,
success oriented, accepting and expecting. Self-directed learning is an interactive
ongoing process.
C. The process will incorporate developmentally appropriate curriculum which is
relevant to the lives of students both today and in the future. It will include on an
ongoing basis the most advanced research and use of technology.
D. The process will develop skills of:
1. Problem solving.
2. Communications.
3. Decision making.
4. Accountability.
5. Group process.
E. The process will provide an environment which develops and achieves account-ability
for quality education from all parties, i.e.,
1. The State.
2. School district.
3. Teachers.
4. Students.
5. Parents.
6. Communities.
V. Recomrnenda tions
The achievement of the above goals will require the commitment of teachers, administra-tion,
local governing boards, State Board of Education, and the Legislature. Education
decision makers will:
A. Make all policy decisions affecting education in the State of Arizona based on and in
direct support of the stated quality education goals.
B. Develop curricular activities consistent with the stated goals.
C. Provide technologically advanced productivity aids and teacher assistance to improve
engaged learning time and overall teacher productivity.
D. Aggressively pursue a course of action that provides advanced learning techniques
and tools at classroom level.
Produce staff development programs for teachers and administrators to maintain
and refine professional and personal skills to enhance self-esteem and positive
perception of education as a high-quality profession.
Provide opportunities for sharing expertise with colleagues throughout the State.
Develop a sense of partnership between home, school, community, and Legislature.
Work cooperatively with the State colleges of education to provide quality guidance
in the implementation of their curriculum which is consistent with the implementa-tion
of the education goals.
Provide programs for parent education and involvement which encourages parents
to assume an active role and ownership of their child's education.
Educate and encourage all decision-making bodies, i.e., Legislature and School
Boards, to elevate quality education to a position of the highest priority throughout
the State of Arizona.
Provide compensation to professional educators with accountability which is com-parable
to business and industry and would be ranked among the top ten of the
States in the nation. This is essential to attract and retain quality professionals.
Move immediately to establish a positive incentive program to encourage voluntary
school district consolidation throughout the State.
Disburse tax money collection in an equitable manner and specifically according to
need across the State.
MIDDLE LEVEL EDUCATION SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
I. The Subcommittee
The initial membership of the subcommittee consisted of four members of the
Commission who demonstrated interest in middle schools. As the work of the subcom-mittee
proceeded, six additional members were added, each with interest and expertise
about middle level schools generally and middle level schools in Arizona specifically. The
final membership was as follows:
Bob Green, Assistant Principal
Shea Middle School
Paradise Valley Unified School
District
*Joanne Hilde, Local Board
Member
Prescott Unified School District
*Dr. Jon M. Engelhardt, Faculty/Admin.
College of Education
Arizona State University
(Subcommittee Chair)
Dave Kennon, Assistant Superintendent
for Middle Schools
Tucson Unified School District
Dick Orson, Principal *Dr. Stan Paz, Deputy Superintendent
Pima Middle School Tucson Unified School District
Scottsdale Unified School District
Executive Director, Arizona Carroll A. Rinehart, Retired
Consortium for Middle Coordinator for Music Education
School Education Tucson Unified School District
Phil Swartzbaugh, Assistant "Adele Verkamp, Local Board Member
Director for Curriculum Flagstaff Unified School District
Deer Valley Unified School District
To provide direction for its efforts, the subcommittee devised its own specific charge:
Based upon an investigation of educational practice with pre- and early
adolescents, to identify the characteristics of schools and schooling that
lead to quality education (as defined by the Commission) for these
students.
Having agreed to this charge, the subcommittee outlined the areas of needed data and
the format for a report to the Commission. Members were added to the subcommittee,
and the overall task was subdivided and assigned to various committee members. Com-mittee
member contributions were woven together by the chair, and the full committee
debated final form and recommendations.
11. Definition of Middle School Population
Middle level education refers to that education provided for children during that period
of human development referred to as transescence. These children have a number of
characteristics which have implications for an appropriate education; these are discussed
in Section IV.
*Commission members
ded025
111. Current Status of Middle School Education in Arizona
Personnel
Currently, personnel in middle level schools are trained initially as either elementary or
secondary educators; as such then, they have little preparation for middle level teaching
(with the exception of some in-service education by districts and professional organiza-tions).
Some inroads have been made in University preparation and certification, but
these are currently having minimal impact. Universities have given some attention to the
middle school concept and related human development characteristics, but have done
very little with curriculum or instructional strategies. The State Board has adopted a
middle level endorsement for elementary and secondary certificates, but this is not
required of middle level educators and appears to be having little impact on current
middle school personnel. Although a set of teaching competencies is associated with the
middle level endorsements, few schools seem to be making use of these for hiring or
performance review of middle level educators.
Organizational Structures
Grade Configurations. Nationally, 72 percent of those schools calling themselves middle
schools incorporate grades six, seven, and eight. Most of these are not philosophically
middle schools; rather, they are configurations of organizational convenience or necessity,
based in only minor ways on the learning/development characteristics of the students.
Figure 1 presents the number of Arizona schools (by county) that could be construed to
be middle schools. These data were based upon statewide achievement test reports and
therefore may exclude schools or misrepresent some schools that had no pupils of a
particular age during the 1985-86 school year; nevertheless, these should be fairly repre-sentative
of the current configurations and their distribution in Arizona.
Not surprisingly the greatest number of middle schools are in the most populous
counties-Maricopa and Pima; these account for 62 percent of possible Arizona middle
schools and 21 percent of all schools in Arizona. The most common configurations are
the grades seven and eight configuration; seven, eight, and nine configuration; and six,
seven, and eight configuration; predominated by the first of these (which accounts for
85 percent of the Arizona middle schools). If there are any noticeable trends to mention,
they are the absence of six, seven, and eight configurations in Maricopa County and the
relative absence of seven, eight, and nine, and presence of six, seven, and eight configura-tions
in Pima County.
Curricular Structures. With some exceptions, curricula in Arizona middle level schools
is organized similar to that of the high schools, single subjects (departmentalization).
Program Content and Methodologies
No systematic data were available on program content or methodologies in Arizona
middle level schools. However, it is presumed that minimum requirements by the State
are met.
FIGURE 1. Arizona Schools Potentially Configured as Middle Schools (By County)
Configurations
County 4-5-6 5-6-7-8 6-7 6-7-8 7-8 7-8-9 (7-12) TOTAL
Apache
Cochise
Coconino
Gila
Graham
Creenlee
La Paz
Maricopa
Mohave
Navajo
Pim a
Pin a1
Santa Cruz
Yavapai
Yuma
TOTAL
Based upon Arizona Pupil Achievement Testing: Statewide Report Appendix. Report of the
Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, AZ, June 1986. (Results reported for a
total of 375 Arizona schools).
Policies
Although some individual schools point out special policies on discipline, substance abuse
and dress code, the committee could find few local school district policy statements
related to middle level education and no State Board policy.
Statement of Need
Middle level education, while present through middle and junior high schools, appears to
have received little conscious attention in Arizona, at least until recently. Since
transescent youngsters have a number of characteristics which have implications for
special schooling, greater attention is needed on middle level education.
IV. Framework for Quality Middle Level Education
Middle School Defined
According to the National Middle School Association,
The middle school is an educational response to the needs and character-istics
of youngsters during transescence and, as such, deals with the full
range of intellectual and developmental needs.
Thus, the middle school is not best defined by the grade levels it deals with, but by the
children it deals with-i.e., those in transition from childhood to adolescence, from
elementary school to high school.
The middle school, irrespective of its title or grade configuration, is one which provides
an educational setting that specifically addresses the social, emotional, physical, and
cognitive characteristics of the transescent (approximately ages 10-14), i.e., through its
environment (schedules, organizational structures, etc.), content and strategies.
The Transescen t
The word "transescent" is used to describe the child who developmentally is in transition
from childhood to adolescence (NMSA). Although physical development seems to be the
basis for the other areas of development, the transescent designation is based upon the
many physical, social, emotional, and intellectual changes beginning to appear prior to
the puberty cycle and extending to the time the body gains a practical degree of stability
over these complex pubescent changes. A number of specific characteristics of these
individuals, along with their implications for schooling, are presented in the Appendix.
Quality Middle Level Education
A quality middle level education is an education that meets the goals of a quality
education and responds to the needs and characteristics of transescent youngsters. The
information which follows is based upon the empirical and theoretical literature on
middle schools, as well as the collective experience and observations of subcommittee
members.
In quality middle schools, curricula are taught by interdisciplinary teams, where the
focus is 011 students rather than subjects, and is characterized by common planning of
interest-based thematic activities. Educational decision-making is collaborative in nature.
Curricula are organized into multi-subject blocks at entry level, with a gradual shift to
single-subject courses by exit level. Activities like clubs and intramurals, which are
designed to meet the physical, social, and emotional needs of these students, are a signifi-cant
aspect of the curricular structure of these schools.
The effective middle school program includes individual and group guidance services as
well as advisor-advisee periods. In advisor-advisee periods, each teacher (as a mentor)
provides directed activities which focus on personal development skills. These schools
may also be characterized by multi-age grouping based upon interests or development,
rather than by single-age grouping.
Program content should include emphasis on the acquisition of basic skills in language
arts, mathematics, social science and science, as well as learning skills like problem
solving, critical thinking, and study skills. Quality middle school programs also make
provision for remediation, enrichment, exploration, and electives. Electives/exploration
include subjects like the arts, home economics, industrial education, and media. Program
content is appropriately organized into a continuous progress sequence, rather than an
age-graded sequence.
Although teaching styles differ from one teacher to another, middle school teachers
necessarily need to utilize instructional methodologies consistent with the develop-mental
characteristics of transescent youngsters. These include:
(a) strategies which address the concrete/fol-mal cognitive learning stage and introduce
learners to abstract vocabulary and abstract thinking;
(b) strategies which actively involve learners (e.g., student planning, hands-on lessons,
cooperative learning activities) and only gradually stress learner independence;
(c) strategies which address these learners' attention spans, allow for physical involve-ment
and provide for personalized, positive evaluations;
(d) variation in strategies and materials according to subject, task, and developmental
level of learner:
(e) strategies which are diagnostic and prescriptive;
(f) strategies which organize curricula around real-life experiences;
(g) strategies which minimize lecture-recitation and emphasize the teacher as personal
guidelfacilitator; and
(h) thematic or integrated approaches to subject matter content.
V. Recommendations
A. It is recommended that the educational system in Arizona be conceptualized as
elementary, middle, and secondary education.
B. It is recommended that the State Board of Education and local governing boards
establish a rationale, philosophy, and policies for middle level schools.
C. It is recommended that the State Board of Education establish guidelines for middle
level education in Arizona that are based upon the characteristics of the transescent
youngster.
D. It is recommended that the Arizona Department of Education establish a facilitator
of middle level education and that the State Board work with the Board of Regents
to ensure at least one Arizona university establish a strong middle level education
teacher preparation program.
E. It is recommended that the State Board of Education join with the National
Association of Secondary School Principals in declaring 1987-1988 as the year of
Middle School Education (in Arizona).
F. It is recommended that the State Board of Education set aside funds for staff
development in Arizona middle level schools.
VI. References
Caught in the Middle: Educational Reform for Young Adolescents in California Schools
(Preview Edition). Report of the Middle Grade Task Force. Sacramento, CA: Cali-fornia
State Department of Education, 1987.
Cole, C. G. The Guidance and Counseling Program: A Vital Service in the Middle School.
Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals, November 1986.
Davis, E.L. What are the Differences? A Comparison of Junior High and Middle Schools.
NASSP Bulletin, December 1972.
Merenbloom, E. Y. Developing Effective Middle Schools Through Faculty Participation.
National Middle School Association.
Romano, L. G., Nicholas, P.E. and Heald, 3. E. The Middle School: Selected Readings
on an Emerging School Program. Nelson-Hall Co., 1973.
Standards for Quality Elementary Schools, K-8. Reston, VA: NAESP, 1984.
Ten Tremendous Tips in Moving to Middle School, Paul George.
Advisor-Advisee Programs: Why, What, and How, Michael James.
Brief Profile of the Junior HighlMiddle School Type, Anne Webb.
Characteris tics of Adolescents, M. S. Planning Team, T.U.S.D.
Child Abuse and Neglect: A Teacher's Handbook, C. Tower.
Classroom Discipline: Case Studies and Viewpoints, S. Kohut and D. Range.
Composition: A Media Approach-Computer and Education, F. B. Tuttle, M. Tolman,
and R. Allred.
Confessions of a Consultant. M. S. Mistakes We Made, Paul S. George.
Cooperative Learning: Student Teams, Robert E. Slavin.
Coping with Computers in Elementary and Middle Schools, Alan Riedesel/Douglas
Clements.
Creativity in the Classroom, Creativity: A Way of Learning, E. Paul Torrance, National
Education Association.
Critical Issues in Middle Level Education, C. Toepfer, A. Arth, H. Johnston, J. Lounsbury.
Critical Thin king Skills, M. Heiman and J. Slomianko.
Decision-Making Skills for M. S. Students, S. Bergmann and G. Rudman.
Developing Effective M. S. Through Faculty Participation, Elliot Merenbloom.
Developing Effective Middle Schools, Elliot Merenbloom.
Developing Positive Student Self-concept, David L. Silvernail.
Developing Social Responsibility in the Middle School, P. Heath and T. Weible.
Development of the Middle School Concept, Conrad Toepfer, Jr.
Developmental Characteristics of Pre- and Early Adolescents.
Developing Effective M.S. Through Faculty Participation, Elliot Merenbloom.
Early Adolescence, What Parents Need to Know, Anita M. Farel.
Economics in School Curriculum, Educational Games and Simulations, Mark C. Schug
and W. Heitzmann.
Effective Middle Level Principal, Vol. II, Keefe, Clark, Nickerson, and Valentine.
Effective School Principals, Commission for Educational Quality
Emerging Adolescent Characteristics and Educational Implications, Donald R. Steer.
Enhancing Learning Through Oral and Written Expression, Ronnie Sheppard.
Essential Middle School, Jon Wiles and Joseph Bondi.
Evaluating Students by Classroom Observation, Richard Stiggins.
Evidence for Middle School Exemplary Middle School, Paul George, Lynn Oldaker,
W. Alexander, and P. George.
Field Trips: Guide for Planning and Conducting Educational Experiences, W. Krepel
and C. Duvall.
Fifty Ways lo Irnprove Attendance, Dan Miller.
Five 'R 3" for M. S., Faith Brown.
Foreign Languages in the M. S. (2 Sets), National Education Association.
Foreign Languages in the M. S., William Jassey.
Gender Differ in Middle Grade Students' Actual and Preferred Computer Use, Marc
Swadener and Karen Jarrett.
Geometric Selections .for Middle School Teachers, D. Aichele and M. Olson.
Gifted and Talented Students, Frederick B. Tuttle, Jr.
Good Schools for Middle Grade Youngsters, William Morrison.
Growing Up Forgotten, Joan Lipsitz.
Guidance and Counseling Program: A Vital Service in the Middle School, Claire G. Cole.
Guidance in the M. S.. Claire G. Cole.
Guide and Plan for Conducting Ten Workshops with NEA Training Program, Jon Wiles
and J. Bondi, Jr.
Handbook for M. S. Teaching, P. George and G. Lawrence.
Health Problems and Sexual Activity of M. S. Students, P. Smith, S. Nenney, and
L. McGill.
How a Lighthouse Principal Revitalized His School, Charles A. Reavis.
Improving M. S. Instruction in Search for Excellence, J. Reinhartz and D. Beach,
J. Swaim and R. Needham.
Improving Spelling in the Middle Grades, M. Manning and G. Manning.
Instructional Leadership Handbook, James W. Keefe, John M. Jenkins.
Integrating Curriculumfor Tomorrow's Students, Ruth Keitz.
Interdisciplinary Concept Model: Theory and Practice, Heidi H. Jacobs and James H.
Borland.
Interdisciplinary Instruction Material, Ratekin, Simpson, Alvermann, Dishner, and
Others.
IntertIisc~i~)liw('l~i.ra~rni Organization, Paul S. George.
fuztcrtiisist~i/)linuryT curn Organizatiorz,~/,; our Opcrtitional I'ha,ses, Paul S. George.
frlter~)c~r:sc>(t'ionml rriunic(~tiou21,'3 111 L7dedman.
fnvolvitzg l'urcrzt,~i n Middle Level Btlucution, John W.M eyr.rs.
Lungutlgcj Slcil1,s in the C'la,s,sroon~1',. C0opr.r ant1 I,. Slrcwart.
Luw E11 forcc~mct~ Kr tluc~ationi n tize Middk C;rades, Phyllis P. McDonald.
I,earlcos/li/~i ii ~ I I CMJ i(klle Levt~lS ~31zool:A n itnperative for E.xc~llence,R obert Shockley,
Larry t lold, Yvonne Meill try.
L,essolz I'1i'ltrirrrin.g for Meuningjill Vclri~ti~ili [lkaclzirzg, Richard IIcnak.
List(~ni~zI'rr:.o r.c*,s,se,\: A ttention, Ilrzder,st,rrzding, Iivnluation, Paul G. 1;riedman.
M. S. K(*,~(v~r(S*eilie:c tcd ,Studies 1 Y86? NMSA.
M, ,I: idi~ctrtiorr: As f See It, John B. 1,ounsburg.r.
M. S. h'c*scpovc~1h),r rvid B. Strahan.
Muin tieirrin~P; rorluctive Student Bchuvior, Kevin Swick.
MetricSs .fbr Iflrvnerrtury and Middle Schools, V. Ray Kurtz.
Midclli~ r;rtlde.s Assessnzerzt Progranl -Uscr.s Manual, Gayle Dorman.
Middlc G'rudes Assessment Program-Leaders Manual, Gayle Dorman.
Middle Levt.1 Social Studies, M. Allen and C. McEwin.
Middle Sclzool in Profile, J. Lounsbury, J. Maraini, and M. Compton.
Middle School fn.structiona1 Organizatiorz, an Emerging Concensus, Paul S. George.
Middle School: A Bridge Between Elementary and Secondary Schools, Sylvester
Kohlit, Jr.
Middle Schools: Review of Current Practices---How Evident Are They.? James Binko and
Jaiiles Lawlor.
Modern Middle School Motivation and Adolescents, Paul S. George and R. Wlodkowski.
Mnltirnediu .for Stuff Developrne~zt in Educution, T. E. R.
Nation 's Sc'lzools Report.
Natiovtul Sua?c~.vo fM . S. Effecti~~ene~Psasu,l George and Lynn Oldaker.
New Structure Urged for Middle Grades, Kirsten Goldberg.
Nonverbal Communication, Patrick W. Miller
PerspectiveslM. S. Education 1964-84, John H. Lounsbury.
Positive Discipline: A Pocketful1 of Ideas, W. Purkey and D. Strahan.
Preparing Teachers to be Advisors, Robert Myrick, Marilyn Highland, and Bill Highland.
Preventing Alcohol Abuse.
Professional Certification and Preparation for Middle Level, NMSA.
ProJile of a Middle School, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Program Characteristics of the M. S.: Questioning Skills for Teachers, William W. Wilen.
Rationale for M. S. Reading Instruction in the M. S., M. Manning and G. Manning.
Reorganizing Middle-Level Education-What to Consider and How to Proceed, Ted A.
Beranis.
School Reform in Florida: Implications for the Middle Schools, Joseph Bondi and
Jon Wiles.
Schooling for Young Adolescents: A Key Time in Secondary Education, Joan Scheff
Lipsitz.
Schools in the Middle-Final Report, D. Clark, J. Keefe, N. Nickerson, and J. Valentine.
Science Anxiety and the Classroom Teacher, Donald C. Orlich.
Science Education for Middle and Junior High Students.
Shyness and Reticence in Students, Paul Friedman.
Student Team Learning, Robert Slavin.
Student-Centered Teaching for Increased Participation, James Kelly
Students Motivating Students to Excel, Robert E. Slavin.
Subject Area Reading in the Middle School, David Bishop
Summary of Hershel Thornburg Middle Schools, Hershel Thornburg.
Survey of Middle Level Principals and Practices, Vol., Valentine, Clark, Nickerson,
and Keefe.
Teacher Advisory Program, Paul George.
Teacher Centered In-Service Education: Planning and Products, Robert A. Luke.
Teacher Designed Student Feedback, Gerald D. Bailey.
Teacher Self-Assessment, Gerald Bailey.
Teacher to Teacher, Nancy Doda.
Teachers as Inquirer, Chris Stevenson.
Teaching and Learning Process, Terry W. Blue.
Teaching in the Middle School, NEA.
Teaching Styles and Performance Values in Junior High School, G. Schwartz, D. Merten,
and R. Bursik, Jr.
Teaching Styles as Related to Student Achievement, David L. Silvernail.
Teaching the Gifted and Talented in the M. S., Jill D. Wright.
Teaching Writing in the Content Areas, Stephen Tchudi and Margie Huerta.
Team Planning and Support Skills, George and Lawrence.
Team Process in M. S. (Second ed.), Elliot Y. Merenbloom.
Ten Reform Reports That Can Change Your School. John W. Miller.
Theory Z School, Paul S. George.
This We Believe, NMSA.
Time Continuum Model of Motivation, NEA.
Tips in Moving to Middle School, Paul George.
TUSD M. S. Sixth Grade Course Offerings.
What is Middle School - Really, Paul S. George.
What is Motivation? NEA.
What Research Says to the Middle Level Practitioner, J. Johnston and G. Markle.
Why a School in the Middle, National Association of Secondary School Principals.
Conference Presentations (audio/videotapes), National
Association of Secondary School Principals
Adolescence is a Required Course, Harold Zuckerman.
Assessing the Different Learning Styles of Students, David Cavanaugh.
Brain Development as it Relates to Adolescent Needs and Program Implications,
Conrad F. Toepfer, Jr.
Encounters in Excellence: A New Approach to Educating Middle School Adolescents,
Joseph W. Hoff.
Helping Students Toward Academic Achievement Through Mastery of Study Skills,
Catherine Tobin, Sandra Weiser.
Middle Level Administration: Operational Obstacles and Obscenities, Alfred A. Arth.
A Nation at Risk, George Melton.
Parent Activism That Can Help You, Gene Berry, Lorna Matheson, Donald Thomas.
Providing High Quality Learning Time for Middle Level Students, Howard Johnston.
School Climate: The Key to an Affective School, Kay Crain, Willard Hopkins.
School Public Relations-It S Everyone's Job, Anne Barkelew.
Time on Task-Research Results That Point the Way to Increased Student Learning,
John Beck, Edward Seifert.
Understanding Brain Dominance and Its Effect on Teaching and Learning, Ted Coulson.
Conference Presentations (audiotape), National
Association of Secondary School Principals
Agenda for Excellence at the Middle Level: Implications for Schools, Alfred Arth.
Athletics at the Middle and High School Levels-How to Put the Kids First, Conrad
Toepfer.
Building Client-Centered Programs at the Middle Level, Conrad Toepfer.
A ttitude: The Essence of Academic Excellence, Herb Sang.
Computer Education in the Middle School, Leon Klein.
Creating a Culture and Climate of Excellence for Middle Level Schools, Edgar Kelley
Crisis Intervention Skills-A Positive Approach to Disruptive Student Behavior, Patrick
McGinnis.
Developing Core Values for Your Middle Level School, Howard Johnston.
Enhancing Student Development in Middle Level Schools, Sherrel Bergmann.
Effective School Climate and the Middle Level Principal, Howard Johnston.
Encounters in Excellence: A New Approach to Educating Middle School Adolescents,
Joseph Hoff.
Helping Parents to Help Kids to Succeed in the Middle Level School, Joel Milgram.
Helping Students Toward Academic Achievement Through Mastery of Study Skills,
Catherine Tobin;.
High Tech in the High School and Its Effect on Curriculum, Ralph Rizzolo.
How Administrators Can Support Interdisciplinary Teaming, John Lounsbury
How Fares the Ninth Grade? John Lounsbury
A Human School in the Middle, James Beane.
Learning Styles: Practical Implications for Principals and Teachers, Rita Dunn.
Middle Level Issues, Alfred Arth, John Delaney, Conrad Toepfer.
Motivating the Unmotivated: Improving Student Self-Esteem, Donald Grossnickle,
Stephen Sarokon.
The No-Right-Answer Test-A Step Toward Critical Thinking Skills, Bernard Cohen.
Organizing the Middle Level School to Promote Excellence, Laura Kanthak.
Practical PR Tips that Work for Building Administrators, James Spence.
"Pride" in the High School and the MiddlelJunior High School, Ron Thiesen, Ellen
Cauthen.
Providing the Best Teachers for Young Adolescents, Alfred Arth.
Recognizing Student and Teacher Achievement at the Middle Level, Ted Mattern, Michael
Pockl.
The Role of the Principal in the Decade of Change, John Delaney.
Schools in the Middle-Final Report of NASSPS National Study, Donald Clark, James
Keefe, Neal Nickerson, Jerry Valentine.
Schoolwide Discipline-Practical Guidelines, Ronald Sinclair, Charlene Magness.
Staff Development in the Middle Level School, Donald Clark, Sally Clark.
Student Motivation in the Middle Level School, Esther Cox, Thomas Hain.
Study Skills: First Step to Academic Improvement, Catherine Tobin.
Teaching Critical Thinking Skills Within the School Curriculum, Michael Brown, Bobbi
Mason.
Technology in the Middle Level Schools, Robert St. Clair
Transition-From Middle Level to Senior High, Barbara Christen, Mark Cohan, Judith
Lamp.
Using Middle Level Teacher Traits to Enhance Student Productivity, Alfred Arth.
What Curriculum for the Middle Level, Alfred Arth.
Working With the Gifted and Talented, Felice Kaufman.
Your School in the Middle: How and Why It's Changing, Conrad Toepfer.
Other NASSP Materials
A. Audiotapes
Retention and Promotion at the Middle Level, Conrad Toepfer.
Climate of Effective Middle Level Schools, Howard Johnston.
Time on Task-Implications for Middle Level Education, Howard Johnston.
The AdvisorlAdvisee Program at the Middle Level, Alfred Arth.
An Overview of the Early Adolescent, Alfred Arth.
Exploratory Programs at the Middle Level, John Lounsbury .
B. Film
Why a School in the Middle?
Materials Available at Tucson Unified School District Middle School Resource Library
APPENDIX
Characteristics of Transescents and Implications for Schooling
I. COGNITIVE CHARACTERISTICS
OF TRANSESCENTS IMPLICATIONS
Function at the concrete operations stage.
Become more autonomous as thinkers.
Experiences, especially in the beginning, should place
major emphasis on the concrete, with provision for
inferential thinking rooted in the concrete.
Can manipulate ideas only in the presence of actual Although the focus should not be on the abstract,
things and immediate experiences. abstract vocabulary should be taught.
Undertake concrete operations based on concrete Learning experiences should relate to immediate
objects such as ordering, classification, seriation and rather than remote academic goals.
mathematical processes.
The development, refinement, maturation and con-solidation
of the thinking skills initiated prior to
entering the middle should continue to be
emphasized.
Display variable cognitive maturation from one Individualized instruction should be provided so that
student to another. the student can proceed at his/her own pace and level
of ability without undue competitive pressures.
Display a very wide range of skills, interests and Instruction should be structured towards cooperation
abilities unique to their development pattern. rather than competition.
Learning activities which embrace a broad range of
modes-reading, writing, listening, making and doing
should be available.
Prefer active involvement rather than passive Methods of instruction should involve open and
recipiency. individually directed learning experiences.
Enjoy intellectual activity when related to their The role of the teacher should be more that of a
immediate goals or purposes. personal guide and facilitator than a purveyor of
knowledge. Traditional lecture-recitation methods
Tend to be intellectually uninhibited. should be minimized.
Based upon a completion of selected published articles and books of the Middle School Planning
Team, Tucson (AZ) Unified School District, 1982.
COGNITIVE CHARACTERISTICS
OF TRANSESCENTS IMPLICATIONS
Like to discuss some of their experiences with adults. Imaginative talent and need for self-expression should
be fulfilled in compositions and projects.
Have a tremendous potential range of creative expres-sion
and appreciation in the arts and humanities. Physical movement should be encouraged with small
group discussions, learning centers and creative
Can evaluate rather critically. dramatics suggested as good activity projects.
Prefer interaction with peers during the learning They should participate in determining that the
activities. purpose of school is learning.
Have difficulty controlling impulses. Self-responsibility should be taught and emphasized.
Possess a strong desire for approval.
Are easily discouraged if they do not achieve.
To assist students in their quest for personal identity
and self-expression, exploratory and enrichment
programs built around students' hobbies and interests
should be a part of the formal curriculum program.
Are capable of exploring and selecting materials and The curriculum should provide opportunities for
experiences on their own. further study. It should also help students learn how
to study and appraise their own interests and talents.
To an increasing degree, can be trusted to assume
personal responsibility for their own learning, inde-pendent
of external means of teacher control.
Rave a relatively short attention span. Cognitive activities should be structured with
frequent transitions and variations. Provisions should
be made for varied activity-oriented and short-term
learning experiences.
Exhibit curiosity. Curricula should be organized around real-life con-cepts
such as conflict and peer group influence.
Exhibit a strong willingness to learn things they
consider to be useful.
Enjoy using skills to solve "real life" problems. Activities should be provided both formally and
informally that will help them improve their reason-
Often display heightened egocentrism and will argue ing powers. Studies of the community and ewiron-to
convince others or to clarify their own thinking. ment should be emphasized.
Exhibit independent and critical thinking. Organized discussions of ideas and feelings in peer
groups shouid be conducted. Experiences should be
provided for them to express themselves by writing
and participating in dramatic productions.
11. PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
OF TRANSESCENTS IMPLICATIONS
Accelerated physical development begins in
transescence marked by increase in weight, height,
heart size, lung capacity and muscular strength. Boys
and girls are growing at varying rates of speed. Girls
tend to be taller for the first two years and tend to be
more physically advanced. Bone growth is faster than
muscle development and the uneven muscle/bone
development results in lack of coordination and awk-wardness.
Bones may lack protection of covering
muscles and supporting tendons.
Provide a curriculum that emphasizes self-understand-ing
about body changes. Health and science classes
should provide experiences that will develop an
understanding about body growth.
Guidance counselors and community resource
persons, such as pediatricians, can help students
understand what is happening to their bodies.
Modified physical education classes should be
scheduled for students lacking physical coordination.
Equipment should be designed for students in transe-scence
to help them develop small and large muscles.
In the pubescent stage for girls, secondary sex charac- Intense sports competition should be downplayed;
teristics continue to develop with breasts enlarging contact sports should be avoided.
and menstruation beginning.
Schedule sex education classes; health and hygiene
seminars for students.
A wide range of individual differences among
students begins to appear in prepubertal and pubertal
stages of development.
Although the sequential order of development is
relatively consistent in each sex, boys tend to lag a
year or two behind girls. There are marked individual
differences in physical development for boys and
girls. The age of greatest variability in physiological
development and physical size is about age 13.
Provide opportunities for interaction among students
of multi-ages, but avoid situations where one's
physical development can be compared with others.
(e.g., gang showers)
Intramural programs rather than interscholastic
athletics should be emphasized so that each student
may participate regardless of physical development.
Where interscholastic sports programs exist, number
of games should be limited with games played in
afternoon rather than evening.
Glandular imbalances occur resulting in acne, Regular physical examinations should be provided all
allergies, dental and eye defects. Some health dis- middle school students.
turbances are real and some are imaginary.
Display changes in body contour-large nose, pro- Health classes should emphasize exercises for good
truding ears, long arms. Have posture problems and posture. Students should understand through self-are
self-conscious about their bodies. analysis, that growth is an individual process and
occurs unevenly.
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
OF TRANSESCENTS IMPLICATIONS
A girdle of fat often appears around the hips and Films, talks by doctors, and counselors can help
thighs of boys in early puberty. students understand the changes the body goes
through in the period from childhood to adolescence.
A slight development of tissue under the skin around A carefully planned program of sex education
the nipples occurs for a short period of time and boys developed in collaboration with parents, medical
may fear that they are developing "the wrong way." doctors and cominunity agencies should be
Considerable anxiety arises during this natural phase developed.
of development which quickly passes.
Students are likely to be disturbed by body changes.
Girls especially are likely to be disturbed about the
physical changes that accompany sexual maturation.
Receding chins, cowlicks, dimples and changes in Teacher and parental reassurance and understanding
voice result in possible embarrassment to boys. are necessary to help students understand that many
body changes are temporary in nature.
Boys and girls tend to tire easily but won't admit to Parents should be advised to insist that students get
it. proper rest; over-exertion by students should be
discouraged.
Fluctuations in basal metabolism may cause students The school should provide an opportunity for daily
to be extremely restless at times and listless at others. exercise by students and a place where students can
be children by playing and being noisy for short
periods.
Activities such as special interest classes and "hands-on"
exercises should be encouraged. Students should
be allowed to physically move around in their classes
and avoid long periods of passive work.
Students show ravenous appetites and peculiar Snacks should be provided to satisfy between meal
tastes; they may overtax digestive system with large hunger. Nutritional guidance as applied to emerging
quantities of improper foods. adolescents should be provided.
111. SOCIAL/EMOTIONAL CHARACTER-ISTICS
OF TRANSESCENTS IMPLICATIONS
Chemical and hormone imbalances during transe- Adults in the middle school should not pressure
scence often trigger emotions that are little under- students to explain their emotions, e.g., crying for
stood by the transescent. Students sometimes regress no reason. Occasional childlike behavior should not
to childlike behavior. be ridiculed by adults. The school program should
provide numerous possibilities for releasing emotional
stress.
Too rapid or too slow physical development is often Appropriate sex education should be provided.
a source of irritation and concern. Development of Utilizing parents and community agencies should be
secondary sex characteristics may create additional encouraged in the middle school.
tensions about rate of development.
Pediatricians, psychologists and counselors should be
called on to assist students in understanding develop-ment
changes.
Students are easily offended and sensitive to criticism Sarcasm by adults should be avoided. Students should
of personal shortcomings. be helped to develop values in the solution of their
problems.
Students tend to exaggerate simple occurrences and Socio-drama can be utilized to enable students to see
believe their problems are unique. themselves as others see them. Readings dealing with
problems similar to their own can help students see
that many problems are not unique.
Affiliation base broadens from family to peer group. Teachers should work closely with the family to help
Conflict sometimes results due to splitting of adults realize that peer pressure is a normal part of
allegiance between peer group and family. the maturation process. Parents should be encouraged
to continue to provide love and comfort to their
children even though they feel their children are
rejecting them.
Peers become sources for standards and models of The school can sponsor activities that permit the
behavior. Occasional rebellion on the part of child student to interact socially with many school
does not diminish importance of parents for develop- personnel.
ment of values.
Emerging adolescents want to make their own Family studies can help ease parents' conflicts,
choices, but authority still remains primarily with involvement of parents in the school should be
the family. encouraged. Students should know their parents are
involved in the school program but parents should
not be too conspicuous by their presence.
SOCIAL/EMOTIONAL CHARACTER-ISTICS
OF TRANSESCENTS IMPLICATIONS
Mobility of society has broken ties to peer groups "Family" grouping of students and teachers can be
and created anxieties in emerging adolescent youth. encouraged to provide stability for students moving
to a new school.
Interdisciplinary units can be structured to provide
interaction among various groups of students. Clubs
and special interest classes should be an integral part
of the school day.
Students are confused and frightened by new school Orientation programs and "buddy systems" can
settings. reduce the trauma of moving from an elementary
school to a middle school. Family teams can encour-age
a sense of belonging.
Students show unusual or drastic behavior at times, Debates, plays, playdays and other activities should
e.g., aggressive, daring, boisterous, argumentative. be scheduled at the middle school to allow students
to "show off" in a productive way.
"Puppy love years" show extreme devotion to a Role playing and guidance exercises can provide
particular boy or girl friend but may transfer students the opportunity to act out feelings. Oppor-allegiance
to a new friend overnight. tunities should be provided for social interaction
between the sexes. Social activities should be appro-priate
to their level of maturity.
Students feel the will of the group must prevail. Set up an active student government so students can
They are sometimes almost cruel to those not in develop their own guidelines for dress and behavior.
their group. They copy and display fads of extremes Adults should be encouraged not to react in an out-in
clothes, speech, mannerisms, handwriting, and are raged manner when extreme dress or mannerisms are
very susceptible to advertising. displayed by young adolescents.
Students express a strong concern for what is "right," Activities should be planned to allow students to
and social justice. They show concern for less engage in service activities. Peer teaching can be
fortunate. encouraged to allow students to help other students.
Community projects such as assisting in a senior
citizens' club or helping in a child care center can be
planned by students and teachers.
Students are influenced by adults. They attempt to Flexible teaching patterns should prevail so students
identify with adults other than their parents. can interact with a variety of adults with whom they
can identify.
HIGH SCHOOL SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
1. The Subcommittee
Background
During the 1986-87 school year the High School Subcommittee met frequently to review,
discuss, and analyze the quality of high school education in Arizona. This report reflects
the beliefs of the Subcommittee about quality education for Arizona's high school
students.
What is a quality education for high school students? Answering this question required
considerable thought and discussion by subcommittee members. We believe a quality
education allows each student to become an optimally contributing member of a demo-cratic,
ever-changing society. An Arizona high school graduate should demonstrate
mastery of important skills including, but not limited to, reading, writing, speaking,
listening, computing, measuring, estimating, hypothesizing, and creative problem-solving.
Helshe should also demonstrate personal and social skills such as responsibility, good
citizenship, motivation, a code of ethics, the ability to make decisions, to solve problems,
to assume risks, and the willingness to become economically self-sufficient. In addition,
the students should possess a common core of knowledge so that he/she can function
effectively in our culture.
Students can develop these intellectual, social, personal, and vocational skills and under-standings
through a well-balanced, adequately supported educational system.
Mem hership
Mr. Paul Brinkmann
Director, Human Resources
Honeywell Corporation
Dr. Tim Dyer, Superintendent
Phoenix Union High School
District
Dr. Don Irving, Dean
College of Fine Arts
University of Arizona
Dr. Virginia B. McElyea
Assistant Superintendent
Paradise Valley Unified School District
(subcommittee chair)
Ms. Joan Timeche, Director
Hopi Department of Education
Hopi Tribe
Charge and Procedure
The Subcommittee's charge was to develop a framework and recommendations for
quality high school education. The procedures followed included a review of available
data on the current status of Arizona high schools, a review and discussion of numerous
recent reform reports, and a list of recommendations.
11. Definition of Population
Dem ograph ic
Arizona's population was reported to be approximately 3.3 million in July 1985. This
population is quickly increasing with a projected population of 5.1 million by the year
2000. High school students, typically between 14 and 18 years of age, numbered approxi-mately
176,000 in 1985-86. Ethnically, the state serves a diverse student population of
Anglos, Indians, Blacks, Orientals, Hispanics, and others.
Determining the dropout rate in Arizona is difficult as there is no uniform definition of
the term and data collection is inadequate. Based on the available information, the state-wide
annual dropout average in 1985-86 was 10.9 percent (19,249). National reporting,
however, reports the Arizona average between 35 and 40 percent. The National average is
between 25 and 30 percent. National data is based on a four-year comparison.
111. Current Status of High School Education in Arizona
Personnel
Of the approximately 9,040 high school teachers, most are trained in a discipline in their
undergraduate preparation program and complete a number of education courses and a
student teaching field experience. Until recently, administrators were also certified as
secondary teachers; they also complete coursework in graduate programs in adminis-tration
and supervision. There are 136 high school principals and 203 assistant principals.
Organizational Structures
Grade Configuration: Most Arizona high schools consist of four grades, 9-1 2.
Length of School Day and Year: School day length varies according to local Governing
Board policy but the average day is six to seven hours. The school year has 175 days.
Program Content
Curricular Structure: The single subject curriculum design is the norm in Arizona high
schools. Required courses include English, mathematics, science, and social studies. In
addition, students enroll in various elective courses in vocational education, foreign lan-guage,
fine and performing arts, and physical education.
High School Graduation Requirements: State law requires the following courses and
units for graduation.
English 4 units
Mathematics 2 units
Science 2 units
Social Studies 2 units
Electives 9.5 units
Free Enterprise .5 units
20 units total
Local Governing Board policy frequently exceeds this state minimum with some districts
requiring as many as 24 units for graduation.
Evaluation: All high schools are administered standardized achievement tests annually.
(TASK - 9th grade, Stanford Achievement Test). In addition, the ADE has developed
Essential Skills in language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies. By the 1988-89
school year, local districts will have plans to certify student mastery of these Essential
Skills. Students planning to attend college complete either the Scholastic Aptitude Test
or the American College Tests depending upon the admission requirements of the college/
university they select.
IV. Framework for Quality High School Education
The high school program should provide for both excellence and equity for all its stu-dents.
The program should meet each student's intellectual, social, personal, and voca-tional
needs so that he/she can enroll in postsecondary educational institutions or enter
the labor force.
In order to provide quality educational programs for all students, each local district and
individual high school should develop long-range and short-range plans with the following
components: philosophy and objectives. an outline of the program of studies and course
content; instructional methodologies employed by teachers; student and program evalua-tion
strategies; staff development for all personnel; adequate funding, facilities, and re-sources
(support services); and partnerships with the community, business, and industry.
V. Recornmenda tions
A. Develop a long-range statewide plan for K-12 education.
R. Adopt a policy statement on the components of a quality high school education
and communicate it to all districts.
C. E,stablish and maintain a computerized information collection, storage, retrieval, and
dissemination system with relevant educational data and research. Provide a leader-ship
role in technical assistance and support services.
D. Sponsor a Principal's Academy for professional growth and development. Funding
should be shared by the state, the local district, and the university system.
E. Develop and fund a statewide instructional assessment system that focuses on pro-gram
effectiveness and student achievement and outcomes. The system should pro-vide
technical assistance and support services to local school districts.
F. Develop and fund an incentive program for all districts who wish to submit a three-to-
five-year educational plan for the high school program. The plan should contain
philosophy and objectives, program of studies including specified student outcomes,
staff development activities, a comprehensive evaluation and assessment system
employing multiple measures of student achievement and program effectiveness,
funding and budgetary needs, strategies to build partnerships with the community
possibly through a service requirement for all students, a partnership proposal for
collaboration with business and industry, and an alternative instructional program
for "high risk" students.
G. Establish statewide Career Ladder Plan for teachers.
H. Maintain the current number of Carnegie units required for high school graduation.
I. Actively communicate the need for excellence and equity in high school programs.
J. Provide a forum for feedback on these recommendations from representative groups
throughout the state.
CONCLUSION
The members of the High School Subcommittee think that Arizona high schools must
immediately address educational needs of their students; must devise an action plan to
correct the deficiencies; must collaborate with the community, business and industry,
appropriate governmental agencies, and with higher education in providing resources to
implement the plan; and develop an ongoing comprehensive evaluation plan to measure
student achievement and instructional program effectiveness. The above recommenda-tions
require partnerships that assure the local district's autonomy within a state frame-work
that encourages and supports instructional improvement. Today's high school
students are tomorrow's architects. We must provide them with the basic knowledge,
skills, and attitudes to build the future.
VJ. Appendices
Goodlad, John, A Place Called School.
The Governors' 1991 Report on Education.
Ventures in Good Schooling - A Cooperative Model for a Successful Secondary School.
NASSP, NEA.
Sizer, Theodore, Horace's Compromise.
Boyer, Ernest, High School: A Report of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement
of Teaching.
LANGUAGE MINORITY STUDENTS SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
I. The Subcommittee
The initial membership of the subcommittee consisted of two members of the
Commission demonstrating interest in the special needs of language minority students.
As the work of the subcommittee progressed, additional members were added, each with
interest and expertise but also representing various regions of the state. The final member-ship
was as follows:
Julia Abalos Armida Bittner
Director of Bilingual Education ESL Coordinator
Sunnyside Unified School District Globe School District
"Jose Carbajal Moira Carney
School Board President Director/Bilingual Education
Sunnyside Unified School District Avondale School District
Martha Daniel Kathy Escamilla
Bilingual Resource Teacher Director/Bilingual Education
Tempe Elementary School District Tucson Unified School District
Vera Finley William James Fisher
ESL Director Principal, Brichta School
Balsz Elementary School District Tucson Unified School District
Renee Fenn Martha Floyd
Coordinator/Bilingual Education Curriculum Coordinator
University of Arizona Santa Cruz School District
Maureen Irr
Director of Bilingual Education
Yuma School District
Candido Mercado
Coordinator/Bilingual Education
Pima Community College
Nancy Mendoza Margarita Pagan
Director of Bilingual Education Coordinator/Career Opportunities
Arizona Department of Education Arizona State University
Lupe Romero
Assistant Professor
University of Arizona
Cynthia Salisbury
Program Specialist
Kyrene School District
"Commission Members
ded025
Macario Saldate
DirectorIMexican-American Studies
University of Arizona
"Veronica Zepeda
DirectorILanguage Development
Roosevelt School District
11. Definition of Population
Language minority students are those for whom the primary language is other than
English if it meets at least one of the following descriptions:
The language most often spoken in the pupil's home is other than English,
regardless of the language spoken by the pupil.
@ The language most often spoken by the pupil is other than English.
The pupil's first acquired language is other than English.
As a result of the ARS 15-75 1 and ARS 15-756, the state has an improved ability to
assess the need for bilingual education and ESL programs in the state, to monitor the
progress of students in established programs, to require that programs meet minimum
quality standards, and that they are staffed by qualified personnel. It is crucial that the
important work begun under this mandate be continued and expanded.
However, there are language minority students who are not limited English proficient.
Of the 90,228 total language minority students in the state, there are 58,665 students
who are not limited English proficient. These students receive no special instructional
services, and may be in schools where the personnel have received no special training in
dealing with linguistic and cultural differences.
111. Status of Language Minority Students in Arizona
The causes of school failure for language minority students are complex-not just
linguistic and cultural differences-but also minority status, the power of the peer group,
and questions about the relevance of what the school is providing.
Often their minority status and their linguistic needs define the kind of educational
treatment they receive-ESL and below grade level basic skills.
The social experience for many of these children is alienation, a sense of not belonging.
All too often, their response is to seek social support outside of the institution-in the
peer group, for instance.
What these students need is an educational experience that provides the social support
needed to keep them in school, and opportunities to learn the things that anyone growing
up in this society is going to need in order to handle the adult responsibilities associated
with living in the society. They also need the experiences that a quality education will
provide-an enthusiasm for learning, for knowledge, and for work.
The State of Arizona has made many positive strides in the area of bilingual and ESL
education. Notable achievements include the passage of ARS 15-75 1 and ARS 1 5-756 in
1984, the establishment of many bilingual and ESL programs throughout the state, the
establishment of undergraduate and graduate teacher education programs in order to
meet the needs for qualified bilingual education and ESL teachers, and the establishment
of many fine state and local organizations to promote quality education for language
minority students.
These accomplishments reflect the hard work and commitment of many persons in the
state who have dedicated themselves to improving the quality of education for language
minority students. However, much work remains to be done.
A large percent of language minority students have not succeeded in Arizona public
schools as evidenced by low academic achievement described in the following chart:
Arizona Pupil Achievement Testing Results
June 1986
Percentile Rank in Reading Comprehension
of
White, Hispanic, and American Indian Students
Percentile Percentile Arizona Relation
Rank of Rank Arizona to National Norm
National American American
Grade Norm White Hispanic Indian White Hispanic Indian
First 49 5 5 34 29 + 6 -15 -21
Second 46 6 5 3 9 3 1 +19 -- 7 -15
Third 46 62 40 3 1 +16 -- 6 --I 5
Fourth 45 5 7 35 29 +12 -10 -16
Fifth 45 56 36 3 1 +I1 -- 9 -14
Sixth 43 54 3 3 26 +I1 -10 -17
Seventh 43 49 29 23 + 6 - 14 -20
Eighth 42 50 3 1 24 + 8 -11 -- 18
Ninth 5 1 69 44 32 +I 8 -- 7 -19
Tenth 48 62 38 26 +14 -10 -22
Eleventh 48 6 2 34 22 +14 -14 -26
Twelfth 45 6 1 34 23 +16 --I 1 -22
In addition, there are some 5 1 percent fewer Hispanic students taking the twelfth grade
achievement test as compared to the first grade. Such a difference does not exist for the
American Indian population. In fact, there are more American Indian students at the
ninth grade than at the eighth grade. But because of the influx of students from the
Bureau of Indian Affairs schools to the public schools at ninth grade, this number is
misleading. There is a steady decrease of students from ninth through twelfth grades.
IV. Framework for Quality Education for Language Minority Students
The literature suggests that ultimately there are no easy answers in the planning and
conduct of programs for language minority students from diverse language and cultural
backgrounds; educators must take cultural facts into account in their consideration of
various methods for educating language minority students. All children, including
language minority children, bring a wealth of social, cultural, intellectual, and linguistic
knowledge that they have acquired through prior experiences in the home and in their
communities-no matter what their socioeconomic status.
Their parents have given them a language and a point of view of the world. They have
presented them with information on a variety of matters that are of importance to the
family and group. The ways in which parents and other members of the cultural group
have made this information and knowledge available are tied up with the group's com-municative
and teaching style. Children's early learning and communicative experiences
greatly influence their expectations about how things are going to be done in other
settings. We must be cognizant of thcse experiences in order to enhance the opportunity
for quality learning of language minority students.
V. Recomrnenda tions
The followirig recommendations are based on a framework for ensuring quality education
for language minority students:
A. That minority cultural and linguistic differences be incorporated into the school
programming.
1. State Board Level:
(a) Recommend policies that accommodate diverse needs of students.
(b) Encourage policies at state and local levels that will enhance the recruit-ment
and certification of language minority teachers and school/district
administrators.
(c) Review existing vocational education curriculum for meeting the needs of
language minority students.
(d) Recommend strengthening of multicultural competencies on the teacher
skills list.
(e) Develop a rnulticultural strand for the social studies scope and sequence
which focuses not only on Arizona but reaches to a more comprehensive
point of view.
(f) Recommend to Board of Regents that a policy be adopted to help
language minority students get into and through the teacher-preparation
system.
(g) Develop methods to better profile and distinguish among different student
characteristics.
(h) Define programmatic characteristics in a consistent and uniform way.
(i) Define terms and use in a systematic way, e.g., monolingual, bilingual,
limited English proficient. These terms are often used interchangeably in
an incorrect way.
(j) Expand the bilingual education unit at the ADE in order to monitor,
review, and recommend improvement to the local school district.
2. District Level:
(a) Develop support systems for students such as parent groups, summer
programs, homework.
(b) Provide preservice and in-service training for regular classroom teachers
and support the value and/or teaching of the language and culture of
language minority students to meet varying learning styles.
B. That the minority community be valued and empowered to participate in the
education of language minority students.
1. State Board Level:
Establish a service to coordinate existing resources for language minority
students and their parents (some examples are shown on the following chart).
GOAL EXISTING SERVICES/AGENCIES
Increase employment of language Department of Economic Security
minority adults.
Provide individual and group counseling Colleges, secondary schools,
to students and adults related to voca- universities
tional planning.
Coordinate programs with the public Each institution
schools.
Provide focus for recreational sports City parks and recreation
and academic experiences.
Provide adult classes and activities. Community college
Provide programs for prospective ESL/ Universities, colleges, junior
Bilingual teachers. colleges
Develop and provide multicultural edu- Multifunctional centers
cation training programs for public
school districts.
Provide in-service and technical assis- State Department
tance in methods of teaching language School Improvement Unit
minority students.
2. District Level:
(a) Develop support systems for parents (examples are provided above).
(b) Promote involvement of home in educational programming (e.g., reading).
(c) Establish community liaisons.
C. That pedagogy promote intrinsic motivation on the part of students.
I. State Board Level:
(a) Support existing instructional models which empower language minority
students to become active learners.
(b) Recommend that the Legislature adequately fund preservice and in-service
training of teachers/paraprofessionals to receive ESL or Bilingual Endorse-ment
to meet the needs of language minority students.
(c) Recommend that the Legislature fund excess cost of educating language
minority students. This includes monies for planning alternate structures
for delivering instruction and incentives for bilingual/ESL endorsed
teachers.
(d) Provide guidelines to districts for language minority students who transfer
from one district to another.
(e) Establish a system and provide funds for assessing languages, especially
native American languages represented in the state.
(f) Provide resources to the ADE to expand the current system for provision
of appropriate translators and interpreters.
2. District Level:
(a) Ensure that language minority students participate in specific academic
programs (science, mathematics, and technology) that will empower them
to take their place in the social and economic future of this nation.
(b) Develop alternate ways to deliver instruction (time, space, resources, and
staff).
(c) Apply the principles of learning and the concept of good practices to all
children.
(d) Avoid labels which diminish the status of a unique group, e.g., language
deficient.
(e) Implement impact studies resulting in policy statements which forces a
level of awareness and assists in the process of providing quality education
for all students.
(f) Develop programming which enhances self-esteem of language minority
students through successful achievement.
(g) Provide ongoing staff development which assists teachers in acquiring a
repertoire of instructional skills designed to encourage differentiated
delivery systems of instruction.
(h) Use the results of evaluation as a way to adapt the instructional environ-ment
of language minority students rather than to classify these students.
(i) Provide appropriate assessment to avoid overrepresentation of language
minority students in special education programs and underrepresentation
of language minority students in gifted programs.
APPENDIX I
DATA ON SOCIETAL TRENDS AFFECTING LANGUAGE MINORITIES
The present decade and the next will see the United States population increase by 40
million-mostly in the South and the West. Arizona's population will be 3,733,000 (37 percent
gain over 1980).
Human Settlements
Population will continue to shift to the Southeast and Southwest (Social Indicators 111:
Selected Data on Social Conditions and Trends in the United States, Department of
Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1979). Of all minority groups, Hispanics are the most
"urban type ."
Population Age
The average age of the white population is increasing and that of the Hispanic population
is decreasing. The sector of the population composed of individuals 65 years of age and
over now outnumber teenagers (this general condition is most prevalent among non-Hispanic
whites).
Education
Hispanic participation in education diminishes drastically at higher levels. National studies
indicate that the dropout rate for Hispanics is 45 percent or more. This proportion implies that
one of four American-born Hispanics is classified as functionally illiterate (Unlocking the
Future: Adult Literacy in Arizona, Arizona Department of Education, 1986). During the
1984-85 school year, over 24 percent (6,054) of all high school dropouts in Arizona (24,750)
were Hispanic youth. On the other hand, Hispanics constituted only 18 percent (30,7 13) of all
high school students (1 70,872)-(Hispanics in Transition, ADES, 1986).
Economy
Nationally, underemployment will stay around six to eight percent during the next decade.
Most unemployed persons will be people who cannot participate in a service-oriented economy
due to lack of education (Societal Indicators 111, 1979). American-born Hispanics constitute
the largest fraction (30 percent or 3,285) of the total number (1 1,136) of the unemployed
members of the civilian labor force. The total unemployment rate for Hispanics in the civilian
labor force is 7.2 percent. Contrasting this fact, the unemployment rate for all persons
included in the civilian labor force is 5.2 percent (ADES).
APPENDIX I1
SUMMARY OF PROGRESS AT MEETING ARIZONA STATUTE
Although bilingual education has been a recognized method of instruction for meeting the
need of students whose language and culture are not the same as the dominant culture, it was
not until 1984 that an Arizona Statute mandated that "school districts shall provide programs
of bilingual instruction or English as a Second Language instruction."
The intent of the law was to provide programs which "allow the pupils to become proficient
enough in English to succeed in classes taught in English."
PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
The law specified that the following programs would meet the requirements:
(a) Transitional Bilingual Programs - K-6
(b) Secondary Bilingual Programs - 7-1 2
(c) Bilingual/Bicultural Programs
(d) English as a Second Language Programs
(e) Individual Education Programs (IEP)
In 1985-86 Arizona Department of Education statistics indicated that the law is being met in
the following manner:
(a) 26 districts have K-6 Transitional Bilingual Programs
(b) 26 districts have 7-1 2 Secondary Bilingual Programs
(c) 6 districts have Bilingual/Bicultural Programs
(d) 93 districts have ESL Programs
(e) 54 districts have Individual Education Programs (IEP)
The Arizona Department of Education statistics also indicate that:
(a) 22 districts do not have LEP students
(b) 43 other districts may not have LEP students or are not implementing the law
(c) 3,000 LEP students are not being served
ASSESSMENT AND REASSESSMENT
According to the law, each school district shall identify, assess and reassess students who have
a primary home language other than English. According to the Arizona Department of Educa-tion
report for June 1 986:
42,992 oral language students were assessed
1 5,382 reading students were assessed
13,09 1 writing students were assessed
8 438 students were reassessed (528 met criteria for reclassification)
38,747 students were identified as LEP
CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
Beginning in 1987-88, classes of bilingual or ESL instruction shall be taught by teachers who
possess a basic or standard certificate to teach with a bilingual or ESL education endorsement.
The Arizona Department of Education reports at the end of the 1985-86 school year:
459 teachers with Bilingual Endorsement
24 teachers with Provisional Bilingual Endorsement
49 teachers with ESL Endorsement
14 teachers with ESL Provisional Endorsement
The Arizona Department of Education survey also indicated that 1,445 teachers who are
providing services to limited English proficient children did not have any endorsement in
1985-86.
REPORTING PROCEDURES
Each school district shall submit a report to the Arizona Department of Education which
includes the following information:
(a) Identification and assessment procedures
(b) Number of students whose home language is other than English
(c) Number of Limited English proficient students
(d) Description of services
(e) Student language proficiency and achievement data
(f) Staff and financial resources
The impact of this requirement is significant. This is the first attempt made in Arizona to
collect such specific data on this student population. The information obtained through these
reports will obviously assist law makers and educators in making future decisions about educa-tional
programs.
EXCEPTJONAL STUDENT STlJDY TEAM (HANDICAPPED AND GIFTED)
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
1. The Subcommittee
Background
Beginning in October 1986, the Exceptional Student Program Study Team began meeting
as a subcommittee of the Commission to Study the Quality of Education in Arizona. The
study team began its work by adopting the following mission statement based on its
charge from the Commission:
A. to investigate and review the current status and quality of education for exceptional
students in Arizona (the gifted and handicapped, ARS 1 5-76 1.3);
B. to use available sources of information to identify standards of quality;
C. and to recommend quality practices for desired exceptional student outcomes.
To investigate the current status of education for exceptional students in Arizona, the
study team called on staff members from the Arizona Department of Education (special-ists
in evaluation, special education, and gifted) and a representative group of Arizona
school district directors of special education. Standards of quality and recommendations
for quality practices were developed through the testimony of specialists and v