Teacher Standards and Practices Commission s1

TSPC MINUTES August 2-4, 2006 Page 1

Teacher Standards and Practices Commission August 2-4, 2006 465 Commercial Street NE Salem OR 97301

MINUTES - TSPC MEETING Surftides Inn ~ On the Beach 2945 NW Jetty Avenue Lincoln City, OR 97367

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 2, 2006

Call to Order On Wednesday, August 2, 2006, the Executive Committee met at the Surftides Inn Ki West Restaurant from 7:00 to 8:00 a.m. From 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. the full Commission convened in Public Session at the Surftides Ki West Banquet Room, 2945 NW Jetty Ave., Lincoln City, OR, 97367 to consider Preliminary Business, Program Approval, Licensure Issues and Discipline Policy Issues. On Thursday, August 3, the Commission convened from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. to discuss Commission Business, Administrative Rule Adoption and Reports and the Proposal for ASD Endorsement. On Friday, August 4th from 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. the full Commission met in Executive Session to consider Alternative Assessment and Discipline Issues. From 12:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. the Commission reconvened in Public Session for consideration of Alternative Assessment and Discipline Issues, the remainder of the Administrative Rules and Comments from Retiring Commissioners. The meeting adjourned at 3:30 p.m.

Commission Members Present Observers Mario Alba Colin Cameron, COSA Greg Bell Mark Ankeny, Pacific University Pat Evenson-Brady Susanne Daggett, Oregon Dept. of Education Francis Charbonnier Robert Hamm, University of Phoenix Susan DeMarsh Carol Lauritzen, Eastern Oregon University Charleen Hoiland Dan Findley, Portland Community College Katrina Myers Don Schruder, Glide School District Gary Peterson Teresa Ferrer, Oregon Education Association Mary Lou Pickard Deborah Miller, Multnomah Bible College Debra Robinson Wayne Strickland, Multnomah Bible College Melissa Sass Marie Strickland, Centennial SD Sam Stern Dew Anna Brumley, Warner Pacific College Leslie Walborn Heather Stanhope, Eastern Oregon University Nancy Watt Nancy Drickey, Linfield College Karen Weiseth Sharon Chinn, Lewis & Clark College Cassandra Wilson Thomas Greene, University of Portland Margaret Mahoney, University of Oregon Commission Staff Present Mary Ann Winter-Messiers, University of Oregon Vickie Chamberlain Dana Barbarick, Cascade College Keith Menk Claudia Green, Corban College Pam LaFreniere Hilda Rosselli, Western Oregon University Raul Ramirez, AAG Sue Thompson, WOU/OACTE Melody Hanson Jim Howard, Northwest Christian College Kathy Rogers Eloise Hockett, George Fox University Susan Nisbet (Friday only) Shelly Smolnisky, Pacific University Cameron Lane (Friday via teleconference) Brenda Giesen, Umatilla-Morrow ESD Maureen Musser, Willamette University Deb Miller, Portland State University

1.0 PRELIMINARY BUSINESS

1.1 Introduction and Comments of Agency and Organization Representatives and Guests (Guest comments regarding non-agenda items) Agency and organization representatives and guests introduce themselves to the Commission.

Guest Comments: Mark Ankeny stated he worked in Utah for the past year where there is no TSPC equivalent. He came to appreciate all the diligent work that the Commission does for teachers, administrators and the children of Oregon. It is a very important to have clear guidelines about licensure.

1.2 Acceptance of Agenda MOTION, to accept the Agenda as printed.

Moved by Walborn / Seconded by Evenson-Brady / Carried Absent / Stern

** 1.3 Approval of Minutes – May 11-12, 2006 MOTION, to accept as part of the Consent Agenda.

Moved by Walborn / Seconded by Hoiland / Carried

1.4 Chair DeMarsh’s Report The Executive Committee met in Arlington in July, 2006. The committee discussed more audience participation at the Commission meetings; expiration of commissioner terms; commission meeting format and the need to have all Commissioners present and participating in the Commission business. The committee wants to continue the existing format of the meetings which involves all members of the commission participating in the committee work because it gives the full commission informed decision making responsibility.

The commission discussed the administrative rule hearing format of conducting the hearing outside of the meeting.

1.5 Executive Director Chamberlain’s Report The director reported on doing a presentation at the Seaside Special Education Conference; the appointment of she and Keith to the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) Board of Examiners which involves attending site visits in October and November. She was also chosen to be the Western region representative to the Professional Practices Committee for the National Association of State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification (NASDTEC) at the June annual meeting in Minneapolis.

She also reported: the commission hired a new Public Service Representative (PSR) who is doing exceptionally well; a backlog of 1200 emails; the conversion of one Office Specialist II position to a PSR position to have five full-time PSRs; there are three vacancies in the office. The offer to join the staff for a day to work was extended to those at the meeting who are interested.

** 1.6 Commission Terms and Vacancies The Commission has had a few vacancies this year and we also have two Commissioners who only have one more meeting.

MOTION, to accept as part of the Consent Agenda.

1.7 Appoint New Liaison Appointees: State Board / Joint Boards of Education...... Francis Charbonnier Oregon University System Board...... Keith Menk / Vickie Chamberlain Business Education Compact...... Keith Menk Legislative Committees...... Mary Lou Pickard Oregon Fund for Advancement of Teaching Excellence...... Anne Jones

State Board / Joint Boards of Education: Francis Charbonnier submitted a written report (1.7a). The State Board of Education (SBE) is developing a plan for high school reform and changing the graduation requirements. There does not appear to be a consensus among the SBE members. SBE will review the questionnaire (1.7b) and to hear from stakeholders on August 24, 2006. Francis, Katrina Myers and Leslie Walborn will be at the meeting to represent TSPC’s view.

Commissioners were asked to complete the survey (1.7b) and staff will create a summary of the responses to give to the representatives when they attend the August meeting.

Oregon Fund for Advancement of Teaching Excellence (OFATE) Attempts to contact the current chair of the OFATE board have been unsuccessful. The staff person who works with the National Board on the funds that go to the Oregon educators who are attempting to get nationally certified is no longer supported in her position. Information from the National Board regarding what needs to be done next will be brought back to the Commission at a later meeting.

** 1.8 Review of Correspondence and Information of Interest to Commissioners MOTION, to accept as part of the Consent Agenda.

2.0 FULL COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF PROGRAM APPROVAL ISSUES Gary Peterson, Chair

2.1 Proposal for ASD Endorsement Mary Ann Winter-Messiers, Project Coordinator for Project PASS, Faculty of Special ED, U of O Marilyn Gense, Statewide Consultative and Resource Services for Autism Helen Young, Special Education Faculty at Portland State University Mickey Pardew, Special Education Professor, Western Oregon University Cynthia Herr, Assistant Professor of Special Education, University of Oregon

At the May Commission meeting, the commission heard information indicating that over a 12-year period beginning in 1992, Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) has increased almost 582% becoming the fastest growing disability in Oregon schools. In February 2006, the Oregon Department of Education announced that the number of school-aged children eligible for special education services with ASD has risen 67% since 2001. Although researchers are unable to explain the causes of ASD and the reason for its increase in Oregon, they do agree that “Personnel preparation remains one of the weakest elements of effective programming for children with autism spectrum disorders and their families.” (National Research Council, 2001, P 225.) Proponents indicated that Oregon has an immediate need for personnel qualified to assess and provide services for students with ASD. Currently there is no standardized TSPC-adopted endorsement for ASD Specialists. ASD Proposal Team: This is a formal proposal for the adoption of the Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) licensure endorsement for the State of Oregon. This proposal focuses on children with ASD and how we can help them by providing the most effective interventions and services to the children and their families.

According to the National Research Council in 2001, personnel preparation is key to effectively serving children with ASD. Caring for Oregon’s Children with Autism, a 2000 Legislative taskforce said we must recruit and retain well-trained teachers to work with children with ASD. They also stated both a lack of licensure in ASD and a lack of measurement of competence in educators are barriers to successful outcomes to children with ASD.

An ASD Specialist is a licensed education professional who shares primary responsibility to: complete assessment; determine a student’s eligibility under ASD in the schools; provide training to assist district staff; provide consultation to school teams; provide direct instruction; increase understanding of ASD; advise on effective methods of working with students with ASD; provide training on ASD to diverse school audiences; and to insure that students with ASD are being appropriately served in schools.

Our recommendation is that:

1. The ASD Endorsement is required for ASD Specialists hired after the date the endorsement is implemented; 2. The endorsement is recommended for current ASD Specialists and teachers who serve these children, such as special education (SPED) teachers and others who teach students with ASD in self-contained classrooms; 3. A process for waiving university-based ASD endorsement coursework based on other coursework that will be put in place for currently practicing ASD Specialists; 4. Universities who have approved ASD endorsement programs may choose to consider a combination of evidence of proficiency such as ASD continuing education workshop certificates; professional portfolios; videotapes of classroom performance; and years of documented satisfactory experience.

The proposed specific endorsement requirements are:

A. An endorsement that is added to an Early Intervention and Early Childhood Special Educator or Special Educator or Speech Language Pathologist teaching license. This is not a stand-alone endorsement.

B. Candidates must demonstrate the ASD endorsement competencies which are based on the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) framework, such as foundations; development and characteristics of learners; individual differences; assessments; instructional strategies; working with families; collaboration; and diversity. People who serve as ASD Specialists should have a very broad background.

The benefits to an ASD Endorsement are that students and families will be served by highly qualified personnel with specific expertise in ASD. Many SPED teachers are lacking an in-depth understanding of ASD. Research practices will be more broadly implemented, SPED teachers and support staff will have access to specialized preparation and universities will be able to provide more preparation in ASD in response to the need for the ASD Endorsement.

Currently Portland State University (PSU) prepares thirty ASD Specialists per year and the U of O trains fifteen ASD Specialists per year. OSU is beginning the third year of this preparation and Portland State begins their second year this fall. There is a pool available now for prepared personnel who are highly skilled in ASD. Currently the statewide special education regional programs hire fifteen to twenty new ASD Specialists each year. At least nine school districts hire their own ASD Specialists and they have an estimated need of five to nine specialists per year.

Stakeholders surveyed included parents, families and friends, education professionals, ASD Specialists, superintendents and administrators, medical and related private services, pre-service professionals, community ASD organizations, and higher ed faculty. We received 152 responses of which 107 are in support, eighteen will support with specific modifications, fifteen do not support it and twelve did not respond citing a variety of reasons.

When asked why it appeared that nearly all of the superintendents did not support the proposal the following was posited: One reason is that Superintendents hiring the ASD Specialists are most concerned about meeting HQ standards and the availability of the personnel in rural areas. Their concern is more about finding people in the rural areas who have the preparation and who have the endorsement. Some superintendents who did not support this may have understood the mailing to mean that teachers should be required to obtain the endorsement. We did not state that requirement. Ninety percent of those administrators not supporting this were from small rural school districts.

The proponents indicated they are not recommending a number of hours for the program. Currently the PSU program has 19 quarter hour credits and the U of O has 36 quarter hours that deal with ASD and several additional credits. The preparation generally can be accomplished in one year or part-time in two years.

The 4,000 to 6,000 identified children represent approximately five to six percent of the SPED population in Oregon. Florida and New York have the endorsement. Ohio and Virginia have the competencies but not the endorsements. Children with ASD may exhibit the following behaviors in the classroom: the child may appear to be deaf; not be paying attention; is focused on one area of interest and the teacher may have a hard time bringing them in. Some children have difficulty with social interaction and communication. They miss the nuances of what happens every day in a classroom which could manifest itself in behavior issues. These children may do significant self abuse, or running around or twirling.

The proposed program would have a field placement component; but currently a licensure test is not being proposed. SPED teachers who teach a variety of children in self-contained environments who do not have specific ASD endorsement would be encouraged, but not required to be endorsed.

The proponents recommended that those individuals who are hired specifically as ASD Specialists, not those individuals who work in a self-contained classroom, it is a required endorsement.

When queried: “Why should we do an endorsement for one category when there are a variety of categories that might look for the same kind of specialized preparation in special education? It was pointed out that Oregon programs do a great job in preparation special educators to work with high incidence disabilities. The schools often have behavior specialists who work with the kids with significant behavior disorders but kids with ASD have some very unique differences. Learning how to be an outstanding special education teacher doesn’t mean than they will be good in working with kids with ASD.

Research shows that children with ASD need specialized instructional strategies to make progress which includes applied behavioral analysis and specialized techniques. If you don’t give them that, they won’t make progress.

Some expressed concern that it may be more of an employment issue rather than a licensure issue.

MOTION, to table until the November meeting by Watt / Seconded by Evenson-Brady / Carried Opposed / Charbonnier, Pickard The Chair directed the ED and Keith Menk to review the information and develop the beginnings of a proposal for the November meeting.

2.2 Oregon University System (OUS) Policy Initiatives for 2007 Legislature The OUS budget building process for the 2007 Legislature includes three initiatives that were originally targeted to be budget proposals. The three initiative areas are:

 preparing pre-service and in-service teachers;  promoting college readiness, literacy writing and math and science; and  developing a coordinated technological infrastructure

The latest word is that these initiatives are not going to be separate budget option packages but have been built into their budgets. If the institutions are asked to reduce their budget they may go back and look at these as budget initiatives again. If the requested budget is accepted by the Legislature they will not ask for additional funds. The institutions have different strategies to move on these initiatives.

2.3 Eastern Oregon University Site Visit Eastern Oregon’s information and exhibits were well prepared and presented. The team recommended that EOU had met all but one standard, 584-017-0185 Evidence of Effectiveness. Upon review by the Executive Director, it appeared that the evidence shows that all of the standards were met by the unit and that the site visit review team may have erred on the side of caution.

Representing Eastern Oregon University: Carol Laurtzen, Professor, School of Education Heather Stanhope, Education Advisor/Asst. Licensure Officer, School of Education

Eastern Oregon has their student teaching placement candidates do a unit study that appears to be one week rather than two weeks. When the site review team reviewed EOU’s documentation they interpreted that to mean that two weeks or 10 days was the minimum. They have two five-day work samples that would be the equivalent of ten days of work sample but they are not the same work sample and it is in different authorizations.

MOTION, to accept the resolution as stated.

Moved by Peterson on behalf of Program Approval / Carried Absent / Stern

The adopted resolution states:

RESOLVED, that the Commission not accept the site visit report as presented, but modifies the report to reflect that all of the standards were met by the program;

RESOLVED FURTHER that, the Commission accept the modified site visit report, and extend unconditional approval for Eastern Oregon University College of Education through spring of 2013.

2.4 Linfield College Department of Education Site Visit Report The College was well prepared with all exhibits and the individuals that were available to the site review team. This is a tightly structured undergraduate program that the candidates complete in four years. They have met all but one of the standards and that was in 584-017-0185 (2) (g) -The Evidence of Effectiveness. Over a year ago, the commission changed this rule to include that at least one of the work samples must include a literacy component.

Representing Linfield College: Nancy Drickey, Chair of the Education Department Barbara Sideman, Academic Dean Fred Ross, Faculty

Due to an oversight; the college missed the change in the commission’s rule relating to inclusion of a literacy component in at least one work sample. The college proposed to solve the problem by investing resources in having someone attend the commission meetings and reporting matters of importance back to the program’s faculty and staff.

Linfield intends to implement the component immediately beginning in fall 2006 to catch the current undergraduate cohort of students before graduating in spring 2007. Linfield will bring evidence back to the November 2006 meeting that the literacy component has been fully implemented.

MOTION, to delay action with the condition that the program remains approved until the Commission acts on the site visit report in November, 2006 by Watt / Seconded Sass

Motion carried.

2.5 Portland State University Special Education – Experimental Program This was brought forward at the May meeting as an experimental program. The Commission requested PSU to bring this program back as a regular program. At issue is the commission’s role in approving an undergraduate program when approved for a graduate program without evidence it has been approved by the Chancellor’s office.

Representing Portland State University: Ann Fullerton, Department Chair and Professor, Special Education & Counselor Education

PSU is recruiting individuals who are paraprofessionals in the special ed field who are bi-lingual from Portland Community College (PCC). These recruited individuals complete their lower end coursework at PCC and then come to PSU to complete their upper division coursework for their BA or BS in Liberal Studies. As part of that program they complete an undergraduate study with PSU’s Special Educator program. When they complete the program they will meet the requirements to become Highly Qualified (HQ) special educators (SPED) or be very close to meeting the HQ requirements through coursework. Most of these students are interested in becoming elementary SPED teachers.

This was presented originally as an experimental program and is considered a one-time program that is tied to a Federal grant for thirty-five students. The grant award is in response to how important it is to bring people into the field of special ed and create pathways for students of different ethnic backgrounds to work through the education system and achieve that goal.

Concern was expressed about the amount of community college coursework that would be counted toward completion of the special education program when there is not specific undergraduate program coursework to review to determine if there is a match to accept the community college coursework.

PSU looks at four courses as prerequisites for the SPED program. They are looking for an articulation agreement between the lower division work of the community college and PSU in content areas such as the series of lab classes and science.

The commission raised three issues:  How many community college credits will be accepted towards the bachelor’s degree?  The BA degree does not result in licensure. Does the Commission have a policy in this matter?  How many community college SPED courses can be accepted?

PSU is not taking a PCC course and accepting it as licensure coursework for the SPED license. These students are required to complete the same fifty-seven credits in our special educator program that we have in our graduate program. How will the Commission view a candidate who has a Bachelor’s degree in elementary education in a non-licensure program who completes a SPED program and becomes licensed and then enters into a teacher ed program?

Concern was expressed about the recruits’ ability to complete the proposed program in four years. The students will not go through in a cohort; but will be admitted into the SPED program at differing points. Courses that have been traditionally graduate courses have been revised to be undergraduate courses. In some cases, graduates and undergraduates will be in the same classes.

PSU plans to ask for a grant extension if all students are unable to finish in four years. The commission would prefer to approve the program for the length of time it takes the 35 students to complete the work under the grant. Technically, if approved, it can last as long as the university chooses to have it last.

Concerns about whether undergraduate could complete the difficult program and doubt about the students’ job-readiness was expressed. PSU believes that the thirty-five recruited students have unique backgrounds as SPED paraprofessionals for a number of years; have high college GPAs and bring credible experience and context to the coursework; including strong bilingual skills and ethnic diversity.

MOTION, to amend the resolve to strike [for a period of four (4) years.] by Bell / Seconded / Alba / Carried Absent / Stern

An Initial Teaching License with a Special Education endorsement would be given to these students.

It is PSU’s intent that this as a one-time program for these thirty-five students tied to this grant. They are not looking at creating a permanent undergraduate program and at the same time have a permanent graduate program.

Moved on behalf of Program Approval as amended by Peterson / Carried Absent / Stern

RESOLVED that, the Commission approve the PSU undergraduate special education program as presented. [for a period of four (4) years]

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the program is not an experimental program, but a major modification to the currently approved graduate special education program.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission review this program with a modified visit and report to the Commission at their regularly scheduled meeting in November 2007.

2.6 Western Oregon University – Adding Elementary Authorization to Master of Arts in Teaching Program.

Representing Western Oregon University: Hilda Rosselli, Dean of College of Education Sue Thompson, Director of Field Services

This is being proposed as an experimental program. WOU is close geographically to the Salem/Keizer community. WOU graduates are hired by Salem/Keizer (SK) and their students do their student teaching in Salem/Keizer. The number of bilingual children who are entering the school district is increasing rapidly. SK is seeking to recruit teachers who parallel the experiences of these students. SK looked at the people who were already working for them: tutors; paraprofessionals; and people who were assisting in after-school programs and determined they had people who were interested in becoming teachers and nearly all are bilingual.

The groups of potential students can be broken down as follows: One group is people who have less than thirty hours at the community college level; Chemeketa Community College is working with Western to help these folks take the right courses and matriculate into an undergrad program at Western. The second group had more that thirty hours and will be moving into an undergrad program sooner. The third group has a Baccalaureate degree and they are interested in becoming teachers. SK is adamant that these individuals be able to move to a Master’s level. Western is only approved to do a post-baccalaureate program. The Transition to Teachers program shared by SK and Western resulted in graduates who did not have a master’s degree and this is not the direction SK wants to go.

Western feels comfortable that they can meet Salem/Keizer’s needs with a MAT program but currently Western is only approved for a secondary level MAT program. There are twenty-two people in this program; fourteen want to work at the elementary or middle level.

This coursework will be offered at the school district and the courses will be vetted by the school district personnel. This program is customized to this group. It is not open to other people in the community or Western Oregon students. By offering these courses at the district it eliminates the transportation issue. Western is then able to offer a lower tuition rate since we are not using the University campus. SK is providing funding for the textbooks and a substantial portion of the tuition. SK is considering placement in their second year for the high-achieving students as a paid intern or Restricted license.

SK has made a commitment to place these students in a practicum. Every assignment is linked to the field. After the first year the exceptional students will be hired as an intern into the Salem/Keizer school district. WOU will supervise these students and SK will provide the mentors.

Western then discussed the details of the program including the assessment pieces. Western’s assessments are keyed to the TSPC proficiencies as well as the NCATE domains. The faculty has worked very hard to design a custom database system called ED-SMART. Student data is entered at each point along the way so their information can be aggregated. Western will be able to track the performance of these students. SK has identified the teachers who they have screened and identified as ready to meet the challenges and the rest of them are going through a traditional program with an undergrad program. They will bring back a full-proposal if they want to continue it in the future.

Support was expressed for the rationale and the focus of this program. Since WOU has a post- baccalaureate program for ELEM/ML licensure, why not use it? One reason was a higher moral ground that the district took. These people are not new to the district and all of these individuals are bilingual. Most are Spanish, Vietnamese, Philippine and Russian. SK is looking at long-term equity for their employees. There are big inequities in our school districts. We do not have as many minority teachers and they are quite often not at the higher paid levels. Problematically, our post-baccalaureate program means the student comes to campus and takes the program full time at the University. Neither partner thought delivering Western’s current program at the district was the right thing to do.

The district is committed to offer a paid internship to those people who have moved successfully through the program. It is not an automatic guarantee simply because they entered the program. This will be a joint decision of WOU and SK.

MOTION, to accept the resolve as stated by Pickard / Second Robinson /

Previous motion is withdrawn to insert “experimental” into the resolution.

MOTION, to amend the resolution to add as an experimental program effective August 1, 2006 through July 31, 2008 by Pickard / Seconded by Robinson Moved to accept the amended resolution / Carried Opposed / Watt, Hoiland Absent / Stern

RESOLVED that, the Commission approve the addition of the elementary authorization level to the Western Oregon University approved Master of Arts in Teaching program as an experimental program effective August 1, 2006 through July 31, 2008.

2.7 Cultural Competency Standards The commission staff will work with OACTE to incorporate cultural competency standards into the teaching licensure program in a way that parallels or reflects the work done on the administrator licensure standards. Work will be done to establish measurable competencies that focus on candidate strengths in inclusive practices.

There are a few tools out there that objectively measure workplace inclusive practices. For example: In the administration arena the tool that the Eugene SD uses to evaluate their administrators is measurable using the met, not met, and exceeds expectations. There is a significant body of research that teachers in their practical experiences can be evaluated whether or not they are aware of inclusive behaviors. An additional piece would be to look at a teacher’s ability to close the achievement gap. The work group can examine what that will look like and how we will look at that from an accountability perspective?

2.8 Lewis and Clark Minor Modification to Education Leadership program Lewis and Clark College notified the Executive Director of a minor modification to their program pursuant to OAR 584-010-0040.

2.9 Other Matters as Time Permits OACTE will meet after the Commission meeting.

Oregon hosted a work sample conference in Portland that Vickie Chamberlain and Keith Menk attended this past month. Oregon is seen as a pioneer in the assessment field. Most presenters were from Oregon.

Colin Cameron is replacing Bill Beck as the COSA representative. The Commission welcomes Colin. Colin was an Administrator for Portland Public Schools and then went to work in 1995 for COSA as a liaison for the administrators.

3.0 FULL COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF LICENSURE ISSUES Licensure Chair: Debra Robinson

3.1 HQT Update The reporting timeline for school districts to report highly qualified teacher status to ODE was extended to July 26th. TSPC had a large backlog of evaluations from Salem-Keizer, Beaverton and Eugene school districts and had two evaluators working full time to finish them. Staff redid the HQ evaluations from last year due to the findings of the Federal Government that we were using more than five years of experience when we calculated the coursework an educator needs to be HQ in their content area.

The social studies evaluations were revised pursuant to the USDOE ruling that said we must evaluate for highly qualified status in the four individual social studies areas of history, geography, civics and government, and economics. Social studies evaluations for middle school social studies teachers (7-8 grades) were recalculated for educators who teach under the basic or standard elementary teaching license or the Initial and Continuing Multiple Subjects licenses with the middle-level authorization. Special education evaluations were also recalculated after the commission’s recent rule change to allow the elementary endorsement, multiple subjects examination (MSE) or HOUSSE to go through grade eight instead of grade six and through grade twelve if the curriculum taught was grade eight or below. We had to evaluate for sixty quarter hours of elementary education content coursework which was a lengthy process. Letters then had to be sent to all educators advising them on what additional coursework needed to be completed to meet HOUSSE. We have been doing the evaluations by hand while we wait for the automated calculator to be completed. The staff completed all the pending evaluations before the July 26th deadline.

A large majority of the evaluations were considered to be HQ by licensure and endorsements alone. Social Studies were the worst areas. Few social studies teachers have completed five years and seventeen hours in each of the four separate social studies areas. A teacher might have a degree in History so she is HQ in history; but no one is HQ through coursework in all four areas. The SPED evaluations came out well. A large number of districts asked their teachers with stand-alone special education endorsements to take the ORELA Multiple Subjects Examination (MSE) earlier to be HQ in the elementary content areas based on the test. The rest we looked for the specific sixty quarter hours and it really wasn’t too bad. However, we did have a fair amount that needed to be advised on what they were lacking.

A discussion was held about evaluating the sixty hours of elementary coursework and accepting coursework that is substantially similar to the requirements expressed in the rule in Division 38.

A misunderstanding that the current social studies PRAXIS tests were not sufficient to meet the federal definition for all four areas of social studies under the federal law. It was clarified that they clearly cover all four areas as had been published by the commission for several months.

3.2 Teaching Out of Field The commission discussed whether to change the procedures for districts that continue to assign teachers blatantly out of field from their license or assign unlicensed educators into positions that are required to be licensed by statute under Chapter 342.

The director outlined the current office procedure of sending out “forfeiture” warning letters for misassignments as required in OAR Division 50. Misassignments are caught generally when educators file to renew their licenses and the district files a PEER (Professional Educator Experience Report) form indicating that the educator has been improperly assigned. The director reported that since the requests for explanations for misassignments began; the incidents of misassignments have improved dramatically. However, it appeared that once again, districts were becoming more lax regarding proper assignments. The director sought guidance from the commission about whether they wished to continue the current established practice or more to next steps which would involve a stricter enforcement of the currently established statutes and administrative rules in this area.

One commissioner inquired why the commission should care. It was pointed out that education is a profession and we are fighting the political will of this country that believes that if someone has completed some college coursework they can be a teacher. The commission was established to be accountable to the public about the credentials of the people who deliver the curriculum. In order to value the credential you must enforce the quality of the credential.

MOTION, to adopt the resolution as stated by Peterson / Seconded by Bell.

More discussion ensued.

MOTION, to move to the question by Myers / Seconded by Evenson-Brady.

Withdraw the Motion.

Without objection, by consensus this was referred back to the ED for the November, 2006 meeting. 3.3 Report on Exceptional Administrator License Exceptional Administrator Licenses must be finally approved by the Commission. Additionally, the commission determines any terms of issuance and renewal. The position is for a one-year specialized administration position as a Chief Information Officer for the 2006-2007 school year. The commission discussed what would be required to transition this license into a full administrative license.

MOTION, to adopt the resolution as stated.

Moved by Watt / Seconded by Bell / Carried Absent / Stern, DeMarsh

RESOLVED that, the Commission approves issuance of the Exceptional Administrator License for Steven Langford.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission require Mr. Langford to complete 75 hours of continuing professional development in order to renew the license, pursuant to OAR 584-080-0161(4).

3.4 School Counselor and School Psychologist Licenses The commission discussed the need to review these licenses in a manner similar to how the teaching and administrative licenses have been reviewed in the past two years. The proposal is to revise these licenses in ways that parallel the revisions made in the other two areas.

As part of review, commissioners were reminded that to renew the Initial II teachers need nine graduate hours; which can be renewed with 4.5 hours of progress made toward the nine graduate hours. These licenses can be renewed up to two times with an additional year granted in extenuating circumstances. By the end of nine years, teachers have to get an Initial II which requires a Master’s degree or equivalent. The School Psychologist starts at the Master’s level. The Continuing Teaching License (CTL) program is nine graduate hours in an approved advanced program.

Recommendations from the Executive Committee to consider are:  Create Initial II licenses in both areas;  Extend the period on an Initial I to nine years (same as teachers and administrators);  Make the Continuing program voluntary, but require advanced competency demonstration;  Require nine quarter hours or six semester hours beyond the Initial in each area to achieve a renewable Initial II.

The Commission gave control to teachers for their advanced preparation beyond the Initial Teaching License. The educator decides if they want to do an endorsement or any advanced preparation. The trade off is that if the teacher does not do a CTL program, they must remain on an Initial II Teaching License which is only a three year license. The Commission decided everyone needs some continuing work past their initial work in the field. The CTL was retained as voluntary. For the Initial and Continuing Administrator licenses the commission eliminated the requirement to do the third license (Continuing Superintendent License) which was the functional graduate work equivalent of a doctorate. The commission redesigned the Initial Administrator License (IAL) to resemble the Initial Teaching License (ITL) except that persons holding the Initial Administrator License have to complete the Continuing Administrator.

An issue for the commission to consider is whether counselors get to choose their subsequent work in counseling or school psychology as an elective. The commission can design it so they get an Initial II. Additionally, the commission can retain the advanced competency demonstration for the Continuing and allow people to choose to get the advanced licensure in a structured approved program. We are hearing from the field that they want the choice instead of a mandatory second step. The commission suggested that stakeholders have input. Counselors are asking for their license to be considered like the teaching license. They want the same consideration that the teachers have had. They want the option of doing the equivalent of a renewable Initial for counseling or the option of doing a Continuing Counselor License.

The commission discussed the importance of offering counselors the same opportunities related to licensure that the teachers were given.

MOTION, to move to hearing.

Moved by Alba / Seconded by Robinson / Carried Absent / Stern

3.5 Division 48 Amendments – Refer to Hearing The commission discussed the proposed amendments. The provisions for accepting volunteer experience were reviewed and the commission agreed to provide clearer language with more flexibility for volunteer experience

The commission expressed concern that not just any volunteer should be accepted such as coaching. Specifically only work directly related to classroom experiences should be accepted.

MOTION, to refer these rules to hearing.

Moved by Robinson on behalf of Licensure / Carried

Resolved, that the proposed amendments to Division 48 be forwarded to hearing prior to consideration for adoption at the November meeting.

3.6 Washington Reciprocity Issues Oregon has reciprocity with Washington State on the Continuing Teacher License (CTL). They take our CTL in lieu of their Professional Certification Program which they started doing two years ago. Washington does not require a Master’s degree for the Professional Certificate. Part of the agreement with Washington included that if the Commission accepted reciprocity with their professional certification program; the commission would accept the professional work but Washington candidates would have to meet our requirements for the CTL which is the five years of experience and the Master’s degree.

Moved on behalf of Licensure by Robinson / Carried

RESOLVED that, TSPC accept passage of the WEST-B as evidence of basic skills competency in lieu of CBEST or PPST tests;

RESOLVED FURTHER, the Commission accept the Washington Professional Certificate in lieu of a CTL program as partial completion of the CTL requirements.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the proposed amendments to OAR 584-060-0022 be referred to hearing for consideration for adoption at the November meeting.

3.7 Division 90 Amendments The commission discussed the uneven requirement of continuing professional development (CPD) for some licenses but not for others. Licenses that do not currently inquire CPD include: Exceptional Administrator, Limited Student Services, Substitute Teaching, American Indian Languages, Limited Teaching, Restricted Substitute Teaching, Transitional Teaching, Transitional Administrator, Transitional Superintendent, Transitional School Counselor, and Transitional School Psychologist.

#1 - Referred to hearing as stated with a consensus of the Commissioners.

2. Should all active licenses be subject to continuing professional development? [Some retirees in particular want to hang on to their licenses but do not want to have to do recency or CPD to continuously renew.]

At least one person expressed that the purpose of CPD is to make sure that teachers are current with research and best practices therefore if a retiree wants to keep his license but does not want to do CPD then he is no longer current and is not meeting the needs of the district.

The Commission discussed the pros and cons of requiring retired persons and substitute teachers to get CPD for renewal.

This needs to be discussed more broadly because we must pay attention and be aware that the Chalkboard Project wants to mandate and regulate continuing professional development. We want to make sure we stay consistent and that we are uniform about how we treat licenses. One issue before you is the current rules do not give any control regarding CPD to the individual if they are employed unless the district allows them to opt out of the plan. Other professional licenses require CPD regardless if you are employed if you want to keep your license.

Discussion tabled until after the Chalkboard (5.8) discussion on Thursday by DeMarsh / Seconded by Robinson / Carried

Commission consensus to defer to the November meeting.

3.8 Special Education and HQT Policy Issues The commission reviewed how the online calculator will work especially for special ed. The charts attached in agenda items were distributed to special education directors earlier in the summer at the COSA conference. The Federal law says the SPED teacher has to be HQ at the grade level at which the student is academically performing unlike having knowledge of the coursework at a specific grade level that is looked at in general ed

3.9 Scope of Special Education Authorizations A letter from special education higher education faculty wants the Elementary authorization level to go through K-8 regardless of the physical location of grades seven and eight. Currently it states it must be a self-contained classroom and they want the physical location piece changed.

When new licensure was adopted the commission changed from elementary and secondary licenses to licenses with four authorization levels: Early Childhood, Elementary, Middle Level, and High School. The intent was to distinguish between the developmental ages of the children in those grades and to have distinct preparation programs for the authorizations. The commission determined the only way one could teach in seventh or eighth grade if it wasn’t self contained was to have the ML authorization. TSPC requires SPED licenses to do dual-level authorizations which means ELEM/ECE or ELEM/ML or ML/HS. They are saying there is no difference between the program a special educator takes to teach at the ML than the program preparation for Elementary authorizations. With the current rules, to teach at a middle level school is they have to complete the ML program and have a ML authorization. Is there a great deal of difference between the ELEM authorization and the ML authorization?

The crafters of the letter are asking to use their Elementary authorization to teach self-contained in the middle-level and junior high school.

The idea here is to stretch the elementary authorization years based on the level of the subject area content and the fact that it’s in a self-contained classroom without adding the additional coursework. What they are asking is to be able to use the elementary authorization requirements to teach SPED in a self-contained classroom at the 7-8 grade level in a middle school.

Moved by Walborn to refer to hearing / Seconded by Myers / Carried

RESOLVED that, the Commission refer the proposed amendments to OAR 584-060-0051; 584-060-0071; and 584-017-0120 to hearing for consideration for adoption at the November meeting.

4.0 FULL COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF DISCIPLINE POLICY ISSUES

4.1 Reporting Issues Commission consensus to defer to the November meeting.

4.2 Licensure Expiration Date Policy Currently, statute requires that for anyone involved in a discipline action (after the Commission decides to charge the educator) their license remains active until the action is resolved. Sometimes the license will expire during the discipline process. The practice in the office was to not allow an educator to renew the license if the investigation and resolution of a discipline action was still active. By abolishing this practice, we are attempting to make sure these educators’ licenses remain active throughout the discipline cycle and the Commission will take action on the license at the end of the process. If we are concerned that a person is a safety issue with students their case will go to the top of the discipline list. The office will continue to renew their license as long as they continue to apply for renewal during the discipline process.

4.3 PA-1 Issues and Procedures This is a very important issue. The PA-1 form is a two-page document which has the preservice candidate’s personal information, the institution in which they are enrolled, the term they expect to do their practicum in and the same character questions that are on the C-1 form. The only cost is the fingerprint processing cost. The statue requires that the commission fingerprint all candidates that are enrolled in approved programs who are going to do any practicum student teaching or internship. The director explained that now the PA-1 form character questions are reviewed with the same scrutiny as the actual. C-1 licensure applications.

Some university folks indicated that there is a problem waiting until the fingerprints have cleared given the lag time between print submission and clearance by the Oregon State Police and the FBI. Also, when candidates have to submit duplicate prints due to poor resolution or other problems; waiting until the fingerprints have cleared can be a problem. It was clarified that the TSPC office has no control over the length of time it took for the OSP and FBI to clear prints. It can sometimes take up to eight to ten weeks. Fingerprints are “good” by statute for at least three years so long as the educator is continuously employed. If the educator “stops out” for longer than three years; then they must be printed again.

MOTION, to accept the resolution with the ED’s corrections.

Moved by DeMarsh / Seconded by Watt / Carried

The adopted resolution states: RESOLVED that, all candidates admitted to an Oregon-approved educator preparation program must submit PA-1 forms and fingerprints to the Commission prior to any placement in an Oregon or other state’s program.

4.4 Amend Division 50 Rules –Refer to Hearing The director reviewed the proposed amendments to Division 50 rules. The proposals replace outdated information as well as break up one long rule into four much shorter rules.

MOTION, to accept the resolution as stated.

Moved to hearing by DeMarsh / Seconded by Bell / Carried

RESOLVED that, the rules outlined below be forwarded to administrative rule hearing for adoption, amendment or repeal.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission will take appropriate action on the proposed rule actions after the hearing process has been completed.

THURSDAY, AUGUST 3, 2006

RECONVENE – Surftides Ki West Banquet Room The chair proposed discussing the hearing format the commission has adopted. Currently the commission holds hearings in the commission office and the transcript of testimony is presented to the commission at the meeting subsequent to the hearing. Some expressed interest in returning the hearings to the commission meetings as they were formerly.

The director reviewed the statutory requirement that the commission review the administrative rules at least once every two years. The rule making process was reviewed in detail. Some expressed interest in also allowing testimony after the hearing during the commission meetings. The AAG, Raul Ramirez, explained that you cannot allow that unless you reopen the rule for hearing to the general public again.

5.0 COMMISSION BUSINESS

5.1 Status of TSPC Budget The director explained that the Commission is an Executive Agency and required to submit a budget to the Department of Administrative Services by September 1st. That becomes the Agency Request budget and the governor may or may not approve what the agency is asking for. If the Governor says no, then its no. The items approved by the commission at the May meeting have been formalized in the budget.

Each of the proposed budget packages were reviewed with the commission. Question regarding data reports from the gallery resulted in a disclosure that the agency’s limited resources do not allow for ongoing data collection for requested reports.

Moved by Watt / Seconded by Evenson-Brady / Carried

The adopted resolution states: RESOLVED, that the budget packages and line-item adjustments proposed by the Executive Director be approved for submission to the Department of Administrative Services and the Governor

5.2 Emergency Board Request for Legal Fees The director explained that unexpected attorney general costs and other expenses have stretched the agency’s current legislative expenditure limitation. The director reviewed these issues with the commission.

Moved by Peterson / Seconded by Walborn / Carried

RESOLVED that, the Executive Director is approved to approach the Legislative Emergency Board, or the 2007 Legislature for a budget adjustment in the event the agency’s allotment of Attorney General fees is insufficient to support the agency’s 2005-2007 biennial needs.

5.3 Commission Advisory Letters The director explained that the field needs a plain language set of directions to give them notice regarding certain issues. Interpreting issues on their own has not been successful. The letters have been reviewed by the AAG. The commission was asked to approve the concept of putting information/advisory letters out into the field to assist w/ understanding rule and statutory interpretations.

The purpose of these advisory letters is not to provide advice but to simply say here is a reminder of what the statues and the rules of the Commission say. It is to say to the field: Be aware of this information and if you don’t follow the rules then you are responsible for the consequences.

MOTION, to accept the amended resolution.

Moved by Evenson-Brady / Seconded by Walborn / Carried

RESOLVED that, the Commission adopt the use of “Advisory Letters” as a method of informing educators, school districts, and the public of the commission’s interpretation and implementation of the commissioner rules and statutes.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission adopt the following Advisory Letters as the first letters that will be published on the Web page and distributed upon request.

5.4 Reimbursement for Commission Substitutes The commission reviewed the need to remind districts which employ teacher commissioners that they may only bill the commission for the actual costs incurred in employing substitutes for the commissioners while attending commission meetings.

Moved by Alba / Seconded by Peterson / Carried

The adopted amended resolution states:

RESOLVED that, the Commission is required to reimburse school districts for the substitute hired to release teacher members of the Commission. Beginning with the 2006-2007 school year, the Commission will reimburse districts for the documented substitute actual cost.

5.5 ODE Literacy Steering Committee Update ODE received a grant regarding reading and literacy. Part of the grant was to establish a steering committee to develop a plan to coordinate Oregon’s efforts to improve literacy. This is a large and broad group who met to discuss these issues. The Literacy Leadership State Steering Committee (LLSSC) has developed a draft “Oregon’s Literacy Plan,” please see agenda item 5.5a.

Key elements of the plan include:  building support for a focus on literacy at the state, district, school and community level;  raising the literacy expectations across grades and curriculum to prepare all students for post- secondary learning opportunities;  increasing educator’s capacity to provide effective literacy instruction across grades and curriculum; and  measuring and reporting progress in literacy at the state, district, school and community level.

There are specific strategies within these key elements that include pre-service preparation and professional development. This group is committed to promoting literacy and moving forward on these action items. This committee was formed by invitation of Superintendent Castillo and the Department of Education.

5.6 Meeting Calendar for 2007-2008 The Executive Committee met to decide if we want to keep the meetings as proposed.

MOTION, to accept the resolution.

Moved by Walborn / Seconded by Bell / Carried

RESOLVED, that the Commission’s 2006-2007 meeting dates be modified as follows:

November 2-3, 2006 Location TBD January 11-12, 2007 TBD [MLK Day Jan. 15] March 15-16, 2007 TBD May 17-18, 2007 TBD

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission’s 2007-2008 meeting dates be adopted as follows:

August 1-3, 2007 Pendleton November 1-2, 2007 TBD January 10-11, 2008 TBD March 13-14, 2008 TBD May 15-16, 2008 TBD

5.7 Nominating Committee for 2007 Executive Committee At the last meeting of the calendar year, TSPC elects a Chairperson, Vice Chairperson and two Executive Committee members. Between the August and the November meeting the Nominating Committee will present to the Executive Assistant the information for the preparation of the November ballot. The term for new officers begins January 1, 2007.

The Nominating Committee is: Debra Robinson (Chair) Sam Stern Pat Evenson-Brady 5.8 Chalkboard Proposals Related to TSPC Chalkboard was formed by the Collins Foundation, Jeld-Wen Foundation, Ford Family Foundation, Meyer Memorial Trust Foundation and the Oregon Community Foundation. These foundations felt if they could develop a public dialog about education issues they could possibly solve the major issues associated with Oregon education in a process outside of the Legislature. However, they need the Legislature to accomplish what they want to fundamentally get done.

The director reported: They used public input and then conducted a work group on teacher quality. They had issues regarding teacher quality that they wanted to address with stakeholders from the field. They took the policy piece that was generated back to their board of representatives and they decided which suggestions they wanted to adopt. They made it clear that they reserved the right to make it look how they wanted it to look. No stakeholders in the teacher quality workgroup felt that every thing we recommended would be accepted as we stated it. We thought there were some outstanding ideas that came from our discussions including strengthening mentors for new teachers, professional development centers, and improving professional development for new administrators.

The idea of having TSPC regulate professional development happened in one day, in one conversation, on one flip chart. Now it is a major proposal in their agenda. We did express our concern about how our participation as stakeholder representatives would be associated with the final decision.

A great deal of strong ideas were generated early in the conversations with this task force. There were two focus groups, the quality teacher administrator and the financial task force. Those groups did not really meet together but their ideas were blended together.

One question that we asked about teacher and administrator quality is can these ideas move forward under other auspices if Chalkboard decides not to move on them? Their answer was, “Yes, they will be free to use but not until this project is over.” There are some concepts regarding professional development that were discussed at length and written in a proposal that focuses around making sure that access to quality professional development is key. We recognized that people who live in rural areas have a problem with access to PDU.

We felt there was more that could be done to bring together a wealth of resources. Right now we have a disconnect between the colleges, universities and professional development in this state. We also had strong discussions regarding mentoring. This lead to conversations about differential paths for educators who love being in the classroom and the schools but have no desire to become administrators. There was discussion about the regional nature of the state, both virtual, face to face, summer institutes, and how to pay for those elements.

There is enough information in the initial proposal regardless of how Chalkboard influences policies in Oregon that it may behoove TSPC to review it once it is released and salvage concepts that may be very beneficial for institutions and TSPC, ODE, OEA and COSA. To have good mentoring you have to have skilled people doing it.

We were asked to consider the issue of performance-based pay. We listened to people from Denver who implemented a pay-for-performance plan. They stated that it wasn’t successful and it costs a great deal of money to implement. They projected that it wasn’t going to net the benefits that they thought it would when it was implemented. I have heard people characterize it as a successful program but that is not what we heard from Denver.

There is a factual error in the first line on page two under PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT where they say, “Currently, educators are paid to acquire a set number of professional development ‘credits’ during the span of their teaching license. Some teachers are paid to acquire some credits and other teachers pay to acquire the credits they need to renew their license. The current system for CPD is not strong. We can more clearly define what is considered professional development and what is not. The reality is the pressure for CPD is here and we can’t ignore it. The director suggested that the commission have an opportunity to look at CPD and take a pro-active stance.

It was suggested that the commission consider having a committee with Commissioners and stakeholders to discuss what professional development is. Districts are concerned that educators would not make a good choice regarding CPD or they want to further their district goals so they developed their own plan. With some districts CPD is a term of employment issue. They have always had the choice to use that as a term of employment or choose a professional development plan for themselves. Every district in this state has Transitional licensed people who are on CAPS or are adding endorsements. Educators everywhere are taking coursework because they have to. The coursework alone takes care of CPD. Currently there are many practices implemented that describe the CPD experiences teachers have that you as educators in the field need to describe and defend. One proposal is to require so many units and so many domains. That shows me that person has never done a CPD plan. By definition any activity in the practice of teaching, because the practice is so integrated, you can’t cover one domain. You most always cover one, two, three, or all domains in just one professional development activity.

It is important that we gather some data. We don’t have a clear idea of what is happening. One thing we don’t do very well is evaluate what we have done. We need to look at what CPDs are offered from the districts. We should not make more decisions regarding CPD until we have more data. The more remote the district is the fewer CPDs are available.

The reason for professional development is for the kids in the classroom so if we look at what teachers are doing, does that have an affect on achievement? Professional development is to enhance the quality of the teacher which enhances the quality experiences of the students.

What is the availability for quality professional development across the state? If the educators have quality choices they will choose them. TSPC has an obligation to review what is happening now and determine if it is working as we intended it to. This is critical before we go into session.

Other professionals track professional development by using their discretion over their CPD except for the mandated specific courses. Being able to keep an active license is related to professional development. If we regulate CPD this is similar to what we will do.

The medical profession requires doctors to do professional development to retain an active license. We should allow reasonable flexibility on the part of the individual. Districts may perceive a particular need in the delivery of instruction and feel they can use in-service for CPD. I would like to see professional development expand a person’s understanding of his profession and his work and is expected to have a positive impact on student performance rather than be tied directly to it.

Is there an incentive to do CPD? The incentive for a neuron-surgeon for example for the professional development is linked to their pay-for-performance. Another word, their reputation is tied into their professional development. I think what Chalkboard and TSPC is attempting to do is determine what the incentive is for teachers to do CPD. Possibly another state is successfully fulfilling professional development.

It seems like more local control is being taken away and here is another example. The districts that do not have as much choice for CPD are looking at online courses. Teachers are intelligent; they know what to do to improve their classroom to improve their students. We need to focus on pro-active, local, intelligent choices.

Gallery: Five points to consider:  Need for TSPC to take responsibility is vital;  Need external creditability in what you bring back;  Use Dennis Spark’s elements of professional development as a guideline;  Look at what other states do; and  Look at resources for best practices.

5.9 Lewis & Clark New Teacher Initiative This is a project that has been launched by Lewis and Clark and is being spearheaded by Dean Cookson and Nancy Nagel. The project is aimed at improving new teacher support across the state. A summit was held on January 20, 2006 that made recommendations to support the activities outlined on the agenda item.

5.10 Implementation of Oregon PK-20 Redesign Workplan The State Board met with members of the Board of Higher Education in the summer of 2005. This plan was developed by the Joint Boards of Education in collaboration with the Governor’s Office. There are people that don’t realize there are private institutions in this state that deliver and prepare educators. When you get into a government position or rule many people think the state people are providing the services. The higher education force cannot demand that private schools do what they would like them to do. Holly Zanville made sure that TSPC was included in the conversation.

5.11 Commission Performance Measures for Governance DAS was directed by the Legislature to create performance standards for all Boards and Commissions that meet this criteria:

 The board has an independent state budget or is included in another state agency’s budget.  The board hires the agency or board’s executive director.

TSPC has to report how we do on these identified Best Governance Practices to the Legislature. On page six of item 5.11a is the score card. Commissioners were asked to fill out the assessment portion of the survey.

5.12 Procedure to Evaluate Executive Director Chamberlain The Executive Director is evaluated annually based on goals adopted in public session. The director’s goals for this past year were adopted at the August 2005 meeting. The commission discussed whether the evaluation tool clearly evaluated the things about the director the commission would like to see.

The director agreed to review the adopted goals and bring the ones she wants to retain back to the commission. She will develop goals directly related to some of the work the commission wants to accomplish. At the November meeting the Commission will be adopting new goals for the director.

5.13 TSPC Data Reports The director reported that the TSPC staff had been working hard to improve phone service. Additionally; the front desk; email coverage and other critical services this time of year have been a key concentration for staff. There have been over 1000 backlogged emails for several weeks. It appears that staff cannot respond fast enough.

5.14 Expenditure Report for the Month of June 2006 This is the monthly statement from the office. This document shows Revenue, Personal Services, Services and Supplies, Capital Outlay and Special Payments.

5.15 TSPC Information Technology (IT) Update Currently we are redesigning our database which includes the forms and tables that gather the data and information that we use for the major initiatives that we are working on. That requires staff time to make sure it is accurate. We are working with the Treasury Department, Administration Service/Controllers, the Central Information Resource Office, and E-government to develop an online store where people can complete an application, purchase the license with their credit card, and receive confirmation of the transaction. We are beginning with duplicate licenses to make sure the system is working properly and then we will expand the store so teachers can use it for other licenses. We have a data exchange pilot with Clackamas School District but we have had some technical problems such as their system does not recognize our IP addresses. Many districts are anxious to use this system so they can get real-time information from our server.

We have a web redesign group in the office. We have to use the Brand Oregon look for our web site. We are attempting to launch our new web site in the next few months. We are working on electronic forms, online payments, web design, and the ability to exchange data with ODE, districts and higher education institutions. A request was made to include Expedited licenses to the online process. We will be able to add items like Expedited to the online store once we are sure the duplicate licenses are working properly.

5.16 Customer Service Surveys We are doing electronic surveying of customers mandated by the Governor’s office including the core required questions to ask. We use Survey Monkey. After an educator applies and receives their license they receive an email asking them to respond to a survey. We send out approximately 1318 surveys monthly and we have about a 29% return rate. We use a five-point scale where one is excellent and five is poor. The results show us to be at 2.1, 2.3, and 2.5 rating. We are at the above average rating. Our intention is to review this survey and decide if we want to expand the questions and develop the capability to do the survey within our own system.

6.0 Administrative Rule Adoption and Reports

6.1 Adoption of Division 42 and Other Rules Related to Professional Technical Licenses Susan Daggett from the Oregon Department of Education shared they are in support of the proposed amendments. ODE is looking for a different process other than the current process which is communication between ODE and TSPC to determine if an approved program is in place or we ask the teacher to contact TSPC or ODE. This adds another step in getting things done and would delay action. What does TSPC have in mind to improve this process?

Bill Manley: Regional Coordinator for the PT Education for the Portland Community College region working with the Portland Public Schools and staff support for the PAVTEC Education Consortium. Manley generally repeated testimony he submitted during the administrative rule hearing.

The director reviewed the proposed amendments with the commission. She pointed out that a major issue is resolved by making clear that an Emergency Teaching License must be obtained if other elements of the PTE license are not yet in place.

MOTION, to adopt the resolution.

Moved by Stern / Seconded by Walborn / Carried

RESOLVED, that the Commission permanently adopt the proposed amendments to following rules: OAR 584-042-0006; 584-042-0008; 584-042-0009; and 584-005-0005;

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission permanently adopt the following new administrative rule: OAR 584-042-0002;

RESOLVED FUTHER that, the Commission repeal the following rules: OAR 584-042-0005; and 584-042- 0007. 6.2 Adoption of Division 50 Rules – Commission Sanction ED: Please correct the 6.2 agenda item to say 584-050-0030 not 0041. We took this rule to hearing because we had several complaints about obsolete language. You are asked to consider the testimony that was submitted at the hearing. The testimony is a request that the word knowingly be inserted in (1) and (3).

The rule would state with this testimony: (1) TSPC may deny a license if a person has knowingly served in violation of licensure assignment. Such denial shall extend either for one year from the date of application for licensure or for a period equal to the time served without licensure, whichever is less. A notice of intent to deny the license and of opportunity for a hearing will be mailed to the educator and

3) Persons who knowingly serve in violation of licensure assignment rules and administrators who assign licensed persons in violation of licensure assignment rules may have such action considered as evidence of gross neglect of duty under ORS 342.175 and OAR 548-020-0040.

Discussion: AGG: If knowingly is in rule and you want to cite an educator for serving without proper licensure TSPC would be required to have substantial evidence that they knew about the misassignment through documentation or an admission. Absent that, you probably would fail in a contested case hearing assuming they deny it. Basically, you take the teeth out of the rule. You can add the language; it is a policy choice regarding what standard you want to have.

TSPC: I believe that knowingly should be in the rule. It is the administrator’s responsibility to know what the assignment should be. I’m not sure how an educator would tell an administrator that they cannot teach an assignment and then be sanctioned for it.

We are talking about punishing people for not knowing what they are doing and it is compounded by the confusion of our rules. We have some ideas about flagrant violations.

It is reasonable to adopt the rule without the language knowingly because the language reads: (1) TSPC may deny a license. The only way a license can be denied is if it comes to the Commission for that decision. I have great faith in the Commission to distinguish between flagrant violators and a misassignment. We do not need the word knowingly to appropriately discipline educators and administrators who operate in the area of misassignment.

Until we change the process where districts apply for a conditional assignment without an educator knowing that they submitted the paperwork, we need to keep knowingly in the rule. The district can apply for a conditional assignment without a teacher’s signature. Possibly a teacher will not know that they are misassigned if the district has applied for the CAP and they do not have the teacher’s signature on file. If the teacher’s signature is not there, the administrator should be held accountable.

Knowingly should be inserted in (1) and (3). Administrators do the assignments and they should be held accountable.

AAG: Having the language knowingly in the rule will restrict the Commission’s ability to sanction the educator. Without the language the Commission still has the option of sanctioning or not.

TSPC: Agenda Item 3.2b (3) states: The teacher must apply for a Conditional Assignment Permit by October 31 for the fall term. This does not say the district.

ED: This is the current rule but you have adopted an amendment to this rule that says the district must give notice to the educator when they apply for a CAP. It hasn’t been filed because we don’t have the internal capabilities to do this yet. The rule we have requires us to make sure the educator knows if a CAP has been filed with their name on it. TSPC: So that rule has been adopted but not filed? That is correct. So do we have the procedure in place for the teacher to be notified?

This hasn’t been happening because the rule isn’t filed yet. In my district, the common practice is once the assignment is made the personnel director notifies the administrator that the teacher is misassigned which then generates a form with the misassignment notifying the teacher. The culpability is everyone’s, the personnel director, the administrator and the teacher.

ED: This rule applies to everyone who teaches with a license. This also applies to people who teach without a license. The Commission applies the standard of whether they knowingly did it or not. In most cases when this goes to investigation and the evidence is this was an innocent mistake they always are recommended as No Further Action. Inserting the word knowingly will tie the Commission’s hands in extremely egregious cases.

Gallery: One thing you talked about was being able to excuse genuine oversight and have the ED bring you cases that were aggravated and repetitive. There are so many nuances with regard to authorizations. In the previous rule the language stopped at violation of licensure. The Commission added the word assignment which delineates it to such a degree that you must pay attention to what the nuances are in assignments. This necessitates a higher standard for a sanction because you are looking at blanket investigations. This creates a higher level of violations. Assignment details escape the layman.

Obviously educators need to know what they can teach and they do know what endorsement areas they can teach. Educators know they can teach outside their endorsement area up to two periods a day. Do they all know there is a difference in two and three periods a day depending on the length of the period? In rule it’s actually ten hours a week. With regard to CAPS, before we had electronic CAPS there was a place for the educator to sign the CAP form stating they were aware they were on a misassignment. There is no place now for the teacher to sign the form. Division 36 rules clearly state that it is a cosponsorship between the educator and the district that was assured through the previous paper process.

For example an administrator at the middle school could be sanctioned if they assign an elementary initial teacher to the seventh grade. For years they have been able to assign an elementary basic teacher to the seventh and eighth grade. This is the kind of nuance that this creates. Without putting knowingly in the rule, you are allowing through rule by adding assignment that you could easily sanction people without the burden of proof of their intent. People need due process and you have to prove there was intent or an aggravated violation.

TSPC: The CAP form includes a statement regarding an action plan for the educator that they must do to be in compliance. Such as, the educator must take certain classes to gain certification in that area. The provisions are in place so the educator is knowledgeable about what they need to be in compliance and they know what they are assigned to. So the system is already in place for the educator to know that they are under a CAP and what they must do to add that endorsement.

Call for the question by Alba.

To clarify, the resolution we are voting on does not include the language knowingly.

Moved by Evenson-Brady / Seconded by Watt / Carried Against / Hoiland, Robinson, Sass, Weiseth, Wilson Abstain / Pickard, Walborn

ED: Here is the language on CAPS that you voted for previously: “A district applying for a permit is assumed to have informed the educator for which a CAP is being requested. Failure to inform the educator may result in an invalid CAP upon a finding by the Commission that the educator did not grant the district permission to add the CAP to the educator’s license.”

TSPC: Our district is using the old application form for educators to sign off on acknowledging the CAP assignment.

The amended resolution states:

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the proposed amendments to OAR 584-050-[0041] 0030 to become effective upon filing.

6.3 Rules Referred to Hearing From Previous Agenda Items Division 80 rules related to Administrator Licensure were filed as Temporary rules but we didn’t refer them to hearing.

We will bring back School Counselor and School Psychology rules at the November meeting and if you’re happy with them we can file them as Temporary rules. School Psychology is very complex.

Raul, can you share with us the information that we discussed in Executive Session regarding how we have people testify at the hearings.

AAG: The discussion I heard yesterday was about what preference you have in terms of how you conduct and adopt rules. In the past you conducted rule making hearings during Commission meetings and then at some time you would make a final decision. The new format is that you promulgate rules by having rule hearings outside of the meetings and that record is brought to the Commission for final action at which time you adopt the rules as revised.

When you have a rule making hearing, the purpose for that is to take the testimony and written comments and whatever else the public might be interested in letting the Commission know. Once you do that and come back to the Commission for final action, you shouldn’t really allow people to re- testify. The reason for that is when you do that you potentially open up a can of worms in that anybody else can subsequently say, “Well I had something else to say and now I want to say it,” and because you allowed one person to do it you have to allow everyone else.

That may or may not impact your decision as far as which system to use. As I recall, the vote was you want to leave the rule making hearing out of the meeting. You are not going to be able to hear the testimony that was already produced at the prior hearing.

Chair: In the past even though we have taken the testimony, at the hearing when it comes time to make the rule we still open it up for discussion. We really can’t do that. What we said yesterday if we continue to conduct the hearings before the meeting that when we had the meeting and someone want to speak to whatever the issue was they were welcome to do that as long as they weren’t presenting new testimony. Raul said we are opening a can worms and it is not appropriate to do that.

TSPC: The other piece of the spectrum is those hearings are outside of the Commission rules. They are statutory in terms of the process that all government agencies have to go through. It’s not really our choice.

AAG: It is your choice that if you want to hear the testimony you can chose to have the hearing with all of you present and the public is on notice that is the time to testify.

You are talking about option A and B. Depending on the nature of the rule you are amending, some of it may be housekeeping and you may want to have that at a hearing outside of the meeting. If you have a particular item that is of interest to a lot of people then perhaps you want to be present for that hearing. You don’t have to have it one way or another. You can go back and forth as you feel necessary. That is a third option. ED: If we have a hearing outside of the meeting and there is a lot of testimony or people show up and it feels controversial we can reschedule another actual hearing during the meeting before you consider adopting the rule. The trick will be anticipating in terms of timelines. If you schedule a hearing it is complicated to cancel it. There is nothing that requires you to adopt any rule within a timeline.

The Chair polled the Commissioners and with a majority consensus, the Commissioners decided to conduct the majority of the administrative rule hearings in the current format which is held at the TSPC office (housekeeping rules) prior to the Commission meetings and the controversial rules will to be held in a hearing at the Commission meeting.

6.4 Other Rule Actions The proposed amendments were reviewed with the commission.

Moved by Watt / Seconded by Hoiland / Carried

RESOLVED that, the attached rules be referred to hearing prior to consideration for adoption at the November 2006 Commission meeting.

7.0 CONSENT AGENDA The policy procedures for the Consent Agenda are established by Policy 3522. The Executive Director recommends adoption by single consent motion the following listed items which are identified on the agenda by a double asterisk: 1.3, 1.6, and 1.8. Any of these items may be removed from the Consent Agenda upon the request of any Commissioner. Items removed from the Consent Agenda will be considered in the order they are listed on the agenda.

MOTION, to accept the Consent Agenda.

FRIDAY, AUGUST 4, 2006

8.0 ALTERNATIVE ASSESSMENT Debra Robinson, Chair

8.1 Candidates Reviewed For Alternative Assessment The Commission will adopt the recommendations made by staff as attached.

MOTION, to accept the resolution as written.

Moved on behalf of Licensure by Robinson / Carried

RESOLVED, that based on TSPC staff evaluations and confirmation and review by the Commission, the candidates indicated below demonstrate the subject matter competence required for waiver of the requested licensure examination. RESOLVED FURTHER, that the candidates who did not pass will be notified by the Commission staff of the coursework or other requirements they must meet in order to qualify for one more review by this method pursuant to OAR 584-052-0033

9.0 DISCIPLINARY HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATION REPORTS (EXECUTIVE SESSION)

The Commission held an executive (non-public) session on the following matters: 1) receiving and discussing preliminary investigation reports on complaints and charges against certified educators; 2) taking action to dismiss the complaint or to charge the educator; 3) deliberating the hearing record in disciplinary proceedings; 4) consulting with counsel with regard to current litigation under ORS 192.660(2)(h); and 5) considering records that are exempt by law from public inspection under ORS 192.660(2)(f). Adoption of an order resulting from a hearing must be done in public session. See ORS 192.660(2)(b) and ORS 342.175 to 342.190.

9.1 Proposed Orders/Actions Twenty-three stipulated orders, seven default orders and one final order were considered in non-public session. Commissioners referred one stipulated order and one final order back to staff..

9.2 Preliminary Investigation Reports and Action to Charge or Dismiss Following discussion and deliberation on twenty-one preliminary investigation reports in non-public session, the Commission directed the Executive Director to charge four educators with violation of standards, removed one case from the list of cases pending a hearing, referred one case back to staff and dismissed complaints against fifteen educators. Two amended Notices of Opportunity for Hearing were also considered and approved.

9.3 Reports Requiring No Further Action Under OAR 584-020-0041(2) The Commission considered eighteen reports requiring no further action.

9.4 Applications for Reinstatement One application for reinstatement was considered.

9.5 Report of Cases Pending Before the Commission Mary Lou Pickard reported in non-public session there are 156 cases pending before the Commission. Of those, 11 are cases requesting a hearing and 15 are pending disposition in another venue.

9.6 New Cases Since Last Meeting Mary Lou Pickard reported in non-public session that the Commission received new complaints against 19 educators. District Superintendents, under OAR 584-020-0041, submitted 33 of those reports.

10.0 FULL COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF DISCIPLINE ISSUES (PUBLIC SESSION)

10.1 Stipulated Order—Aiken, Nancy Margaret ( Salem-Keizer SD) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

Approved as part of the Discipline Consent Agenda / Carried Absent / na

The printed resolutions state:

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Order of Reprimand and Probation for Nancy Margaret Aiken. The order imposes a Public Reprimand upon Aiken and places her on probation for four years subject to terms and conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Salem-Keizer School District of this action.

The adopted order states:

The Commission adopts the above finding of facts and hereby imposes a Public Reprimand upon Ms. Aiken. The Stipulation of Facts, Order of Reprimand and Probation constitutes the Reprimand.

Furthermore, the Commission imposes a four (4) year probation upon Ms. Aiken to commence the date of adoption of this order and subject to the following terms and conditions of probation: 1. Ms. Aiken shall, at her own initiative and expense, continue to obtain treatment for her alcohol dependency as recommended by her alcohol treatment provider and abstain from the consumption of alcohol; 2. During the period of this probation, Ms. Aiken shall submit to the Executive Director of the Commission reports of her compliance with the aftercare treatment plan. Ms. Aiken shall provide these reports every six (6) months during her probation, on or before: February 4, 2007; August 4, 2007; February 4, 2008; August 4, 2008; February 4, 2009; August 4, 2009; February 4, 2010; and August 4, 2010; 3. Ms. Aiken shall report in writing within ten days to the Executive Director of the Commission any arrest or citation for any felony, misdemeanor, major traffic violation or violation of criminal probation; and 4. Ms. Aiken shall comply with the Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators under Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 584, Division 020.

Violation of any term or condition of probation shall constitute an independent basis for the Commission to revoke Ms. Aiken’s teaching license or otherwise impose discipline, after first providing Ms. Aiken with notice and opportunity for hearing.

10.2 Stipulated Order—Anthony, Ronald Allen (Morrow County SD) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Final Order of Suspension and Probation for Ronald Allen Anthony. The order suspends Anthony’s Standard Administrative License for a period of thirty (30) days. At the end of the suspension period, Anthony may apply for reinstatement. Upon reinstatement of licensure, Anthony shall be placed on probation for a period of eighteen months subject to terms and conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Morrow County School District of this action.

The Commission hereby adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of fact and imposes a thirty (30) day suspension upon Ronald Allen Anthony’s Standard Administrative License effective the date of this Order. At the end of this suspension period, Mr. Anthony’s Standard Administrative License will be reinstated upon Submission of a complete application and fees pursuant to OAR 584-050-0015(3).

Upon the reinstatement of licensure, Mr. Anthony shall be placed on probation by the Commission for a period of eighteen (18) months, subject to the following terms and conditions: 1. During the period of this probation Mr. Anthony shall provide satisfactory evidence that he is in compliance with all Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators pursuant to OAR Chapter 584 Division 020. Mr. Anthony shall submit these reports to the Executive Director of the Commission every six (6) month during his probation, on or before: February 2, 2007; August 2, 2007; and February 2, 2008.

Violation of any term or condition of probation shall constitute an independent basis for the Commission to revoke Mr. Anthony’s licensure or otherwise impose discipline, after first providing Mr. Anthony with notice and opportunity for hearing.

10.3 Stipulated Order—Bebb, Loren Allen ( Morrow County SD) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Order of Suspension and Probation for Loren Eugene Bebb. The order suspends Bebb’s Standard Teaching License for a period of thirty (30) days. At the end of the suspension period, Bebb may apply for reinstatement. Upon reinstatement of licensure, Bebb shall be placed on probation for a period of eighteen months subject to conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Prairie City School District of this action.

Loren Eugene Bebb’s Standard Teaching License is suspended for a period of thirty (30) days effective August 4, 2005. At the end of this suspension period, Mr. Bebb’s Standard Teaching License will be reinstated upon submission of a complete application and fees pursuant to OAR 584-050-0015(3).

Upon the reinstatement of licensure, Mr. Bebb shall be placed on probation by the Commission for a period of eighteen (18) months, subject to the following conditions: 1. Mr. Bebb shall report in writing within ten days to the Executive Director of the Commission any arrest or citation for any felony, misdemeanor, major traffic violation or violation of criminal probation; and 2. Mr. Bebb shall comply with all Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators under Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 584, Division 020.

Violation of the terms of this probation may constitute an independent basis for the Commission to impose discipline, up to and including revocation of Mr. Bebb’s teaching license subject to Mr. Bebb’s right to a hearing on the issue of whether he violated probation.

10.4 Stipulated Order—Benjamin, William ( n/a) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions. Approved as part of the Discipline Consent Agenda / Carried Absent / na

The printed resolution states:

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulated Agreement and Order for William Gahan Benjamin. The order grants the application of Benjamin for an Oregon teaching license and places him on probation for three years subject to conditions.

In determining an appropriate action in this case, the Commission takes the following factors into account: Mr. Benjamin’s misconduct occurred more than 15 years ago. He appears from his testimony to be genuinely remorseful. He successfully completed the teaching preparation program at Western Oregon University and received supportive testimony from Linda Cress, his supervisor in the student-teaching program, who believes Mr. Benjamin shows promise as a classroom teacher. On the other hand, the Commission has concerns that Mr. Benjamin was less than forthcoming in his application to the Commission and that he minimized the conduct that led to his disbarment. The Commission also has concerns that Mr. Benjamin has not undergone counseling or other therapy to deal with the issues that led to his problems with the Oregon State Bar. On balance, the Commission believes it is appropriate to allow Mr. Benjamin to have a chance to succeed as a teacher, and the Commission will issue a teaching license to him on a probationary basis.

The Commission GRANTS the application of William Gahan Benjamin for an Oregon Teaching License and places Mr. Benjamin on probation to the Commission for a period of three years from the date of this order and subject to the following conditions:

1. Mr. Benjamin shall report to the Commission in writing within 10 days any formal discipline he receives from a school employer. 2. Mr. Benjamin shall report truthfully and shall fully disclose any information that is requested by a prospective school employer concerning Mr. Benjamin’s prior discipline by the Commission and the Oregon State Bar (including a copy of this Order, if requested). Mr. Benjamin shall also fully disclose any such information, if requested, on any documents he submits related to licensure, employment or professional duties. 3. Mr. Benjamin shall comply with all Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Educators under OAR 584 Division 020.

Violation of the terms of this probation may constitute an independent basis for the Commission to impose discipline, up to and including revocation of Mr. Benjamin’s Oregon Teaching License, subject to his rights to a hearing on the issue of whether he violated probation.

10.5 Stipulated Order—Bright, Isaac D. ( Sutherlin SD ) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Surrender and Order of Revocation for Isaac D. Bright. The order accepts the surrender of Bright’s Restricted Teaching License and hereby revokes said license.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Sutherlin School District of this action.

The Commission accepts the surrender of Isaac D. Bright’s Restricted Teaching License and hereby revokes said license.

10.6 Stipulated Order—Cladouhos, Staci Jo ( Woodburn SD ) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Final Order of Reprimand and Probation for Staci Jo Cladouhos. The order imposes a Public Reprimand upon Cladouhos and places her on probation for two (2) years subject to conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Woodburn School District of this action.

The Commission adopts and incorporates herein the above finding of facts, conclusions of law, and based thereon, hereby imposes a Public Reprimand on Staci Jo Cladouhos. This Order shall serve as the Public Reprimand.

Furthermore, the Commission places Ms. Cladouhos on Probation for a period of two (2) years to commence the date of this order, subject to the condition that she will comply with the Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators pursuant to Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 584, Division 020.

Violation of any term of probation shall constitute an independent basis for the Commission to revoke Ms. Cladouhos’ teaching license or otherwise impose discipline, after first providing Ms. Cladouhos with notice and opportunity for hearing

10.7 Stipulated Order —Clifford, Lori Ann ( Beaverton SD ) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts and Final Order of Probation for Lori Ann Clifford. The Order extends Clifford’s Probation for two (2) additional years to September 4, 2009, subject to terms and conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Beaverton School District of this action. The adopted order states:

The Commission adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of fact and conclusion of law, and based hereon, hereby extends Ms. Clifford’s Probation for a period of two (2) additional years, to September 4, 2009, subject to the following terms and conditions:

1. Ms. Clifford shall, at her own initiative and expense, continue to obtain treatment for her alcohol dependency as recommended by her alcohol treatment provider and abstain from the consumption of alcohol; 2. During the period of her probation, Ms. Clifford shall submit to the Executive Director of the Commission reports of her compliance with the aftercare treatment plan. Ms. Clifford shall provide these reports every six (6) months during her probation, on or before September 4, 2006; March 4, 2007; September 4, 2007; March 4, 2008, September 4, 2008, March 4, 2009; and September 4, 2009; 3. Ms. Clifford shall conduct herself as a law-abiding citizen; 4. Ms. Clifford shall report in writing within ten days to the Executive Director of the Commission any arrest or citation for any felony, misdemeanor, major traffic violation or violation of criminal probation; and 5. Ms. Clifford shall comply with the Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators under Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 584, Division 020.

Violation of any term or condition of probation shall constitute an independent basis for the Commission to revoke Ms. Clifford’s licensure or otherwise impose discipline, after first providing Ms. Clifford with notice and opportunity for hearing.

10.8 Stipulated Order—Crain, Lawrence Roy ( Central Point SD ) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Final Order of Reprimand and Probation for Lawrence Roy Crain. The order imposes a Public Reprimand upon Crain and places him on probation for two (2) years subject to conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Central Point School District of this action.

The Commission hereby adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of fact and imposes a Public Reprimand on Lawrence Roy Crain. This Stipulation of Facts, Order and Probation constitute the Reprimand.

Furthermore, the Commission imposes a two (2) year probation upon Mr. Crain requiring that Mr. Crain comply with all Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance under Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 584, Division 020.

Violation of the terms of this probation may constitute an independent basis for the Commission to impose discipline, up to and including revocation of Mr. Crain’s teaching license subject to Mr. Crain’s right to a hearing on the issue of whether he violated probation. 10.9 Stipulated Order—Curtis, Edward R. (Central Linn SD) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

Approved as part of the Discipline Consent Agenda / Carried Absent / Cedillo

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts and Order of Reprimand for Edward R. Curtis. The order imposes a Public Reprimand upon Curtis.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Central Linn School District of this action.

The Commission hereby imposes a Public Reprimand upon Edward R. Curtis. This Order shall serve as the Public Reprimand.

10.10 Stipulated Order—Dixon, Lance LeRoy (North Powder SD) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts and Final Order of Reprimand for Lance Leroy Dixon. The Order imposes a Public Reprimand upon Dixon.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the North Powder School District of this action.

The Commission hereby adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of fact, conclusion of law and imposes a Public Reprimand upon the licensure of Lance Leroy Dixon. This order shall serve as the Public Reprimand.

10.11 Stipulated Order—Engebretson, Michael Alan (Warrenton-Hammond SD) Removed from the Consent Agenda.

10.12 Stipulated Order—Gordon, Michael Richard (Prospect SD) Removed from the Consent Agenda and resubmitted to the Executive Director for re-evaluation with a recommendation for license suspension.

10.13 Stipulated Order—Hackett, Leonard Dean (Salem-Keizer SD) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

The printed resolutions state: RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Final Order of Suspension and Probation for Leonard Dean Hackett. The order suspends Hackett’s Initial Teaching License for a period of ninety (90) days. At the end of the suspension period, Hackett may apply for reinstatement with conditions. Upon reinstatement of licensure, Hackett shall be placed on probation for a period of four (4) years subject to conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Salem-Keizer School District of this action.

The Commission adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of fact and conclusion of law, based thereon, hereby orders that Leonard Dean Hackett’s Initial Teaching License is suspended for a period of ninety (90) days effective August 4, 2006. At the end of this suspension period, Mr. Hackett’s Initial Teaching License will be reinstated upon:

1. Submission of a complete application and fees pursuant to OAR 584-050-0015(3); and 2. Submission of documentation that he has undergone an evaluation by a psychotherapist or medical professional acceptable to the Commission, and the evaluator submits a written report to the Commission attesting (a) Mr. Hackett is fit to work with children and teenagers, and (b) there is a high probability he will not use school district equipment to access sexually explicit materials or engage in similar inappropriate behavior. Any costs associated with the assessment or treatment will be the responsibility of Mr. Hackett.

Upon the reinstatement of licensure, Mr. Hackett shall be placed on probation by the Commission for a period of four (4) years, subject to the following conditions: a. Mr. Hackett shall substantially comply with any treatment or counseling as recommended by the individual who completed the evaluation described above. Mr. Hackett shall authorize and sign any consent forms as necessary for the treatment provider or counselor to furnish records to or discuss Mr. Hackett’s treatment with the Commission. b. Mr. Hackett shall comply with all Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators under Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 584, Division 020. c. Mr. Hackett shall provide information as requested by the Commission to verify that he has complied with the conditions of probation, including a statement from a future employing district that he has complied with the Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators.

Violation of the terms of this probation may constitute an independent basis for the Commission to impose discipline, up to and including revocation of Mr. Hackett’s teaching license subject to Mr. Hackett’s right to a hearing on the issue of whether he violated probation.

10.14 Stipulated Order—Hitchko, Bettye S. (Phoenix-Talent SD) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts and Final Order of Reprimand for Bettye S. Hitchko. The order imposes a Public Reprimand upon the licensure of Hitchko.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Phoenix-Talent School District of this action.

The Commission hereby adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of fact, conclusions of law and imposes a Public Reprimand upon the licensure of Bettye S. Hitchko. This order shall serve as the Public Reprimand.

10.15 Default Order—Iverson, Lynne Diane (n/a) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Default Order of Denial of Teaching License for Lynne Diane Iverson. The Order denies the application of Iverson for an Oregon teaching license.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the North Wasco County SD, Sherman County School District and Region 9 Education Service District of this action.

The Commission hereby adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of fact and conclusion of law, and based thereon, hereby denies the application of Lynne Dianne Iverson for an Oregon Teaching License.

10.16 Stipulated Order—Johnston, Wanda Ruth (Port Orford-Langlois SD) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts and Final Order of Surrender of Right to Apply for Wanda R. Johnston. The order suspends the right of Johnston to apply for an Oregon teaching license for one year. After the period of suspension of her right to apply, Johnston may apply for reinstatement of licensure pursuant to OAR 584-050-0015(3).

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Port-Orford Langlois School District of this action.

The Commission adopts and incorporates herein the above finding of facts and conclusions of law, and based thereon, hereby suspends the right of Wanda R. Johnston to apply for a teaching license for one year from the date of this order. After the period of suspension of her right to apply, Ms. Johnston may apply for reinstatement of licensure pursuant to OAR 584-050-0015(3). The Commission will require Ms. Johnston to provide evidence of mental fitness to serve as an educator.

10.17 Stipulated Order—Lanni, Anthony P. (North Central ESD) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts and Final Order of Reprimand for Anthony P. Lanni. The order imposes a Public Reprimand upon the licensure of Lanni.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the North Central Education Service District of this action.

The Commission hereby adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of fact, conclusion of law and imposes a Public Reprimand upon the licensure of Anthony P. Lanni. This order shall serve as the Public Reprimand.

10.18 Default Order—Meling, Troy Randolph ( Gresham-Barlow SD ) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Default Order of License Revocation for Troy Randolph Meling. The order revokes Meling’s Standard Teaching License.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Gresham-Barlow School District of this action.

The Commission adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of fact and conclusion of law, and based thereon, hereby revokes the Standard Teaching License issued to Troy Randolph Meling.

10.19 Default Order—Newkirk, Mark Allen ( n/a ) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

The printed resolution states:

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Default Order of Revocation of Right to Apply for Mark Allan Newkirk. The order revokes Newkirk’s right to apply for a license. The adopted order states:

The Commission adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of fact and conclusions of law, and based thereon hereby revokes Mark Allan Newkirk’s right to apply for a license.

10.20 Stipulated Order—Nichols, Christine Marie ( Brookings-Harbor SD ) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts and Final Order of Reprimand for Christine Marie Nichols. The order imposes a Public Reprimand on Nichols.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Brookings-Harbor School District of this action.

The Commission hereby adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of fact and conclusion of law and based thereon, hereby imposes a Public Reprimand on Christine Marie Nichols. This Order shall serve as the Public Reprimand.

10.21 Stipulated Order—Nuffer, Christine ( Molalla River SD ) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts and Final Order of Suspension of Right to Apply for Christine Nuffer. The order suspends the right of Nuffer to apply for an Oregon teaching license for a period of six (6) months.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Molalla River School District of this action.

The Commission adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of facts and conclusions of law, and based thereon, hereby ORDERS that Christine Nuffer’s right to apply for licensure is suspended for a period of six (6) months effective and beginning August 4, 2006.

10.22 Default Order—Perry, Mathew Allen ( Nyssa SD ) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

The printed resolutions state: RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Default Order of License Revocation and Revocation of Right to Apply for a License for Matthew Allen Perry. The Order revokes Perry’s Restricted Transitional Teaching License and Transitional Teaching and revokes his right to apply for a teaching license.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Nyssa School District of this action.

The Commission adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of fact and conclusion of law, and based thereon, hereby revokes the Restricted Transitional Teaching License and Transitional Teaching License issued to Matthew Allen Perry and revokes his right to apply for a teaching license.

10.23 Stipulated Order—Ramos, Heidi Louise ( Corvallis SD ) Removed from the Consent Agenda.

10.24 Default Order—Raymond, Adrienne Lee ( Sheridan SD ) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Default Order of License Revocation and Revocation of Right to Apply for a License for Adrienne Lee Raymond. The Order revokes Raymond’s Initial Teaching License and revokes her right to apply for a license.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Sheridan School District of this action.

The Commission adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of fact and conclusions of law and hereby revokes the Initial Teaching License issued to Adrienne Lee Raymond and revokes her right to apply for a license.

10.25 Final Order—Shappell, Donna Louise ( Beaverton SD ) No further action at this time. Referred to AAG for review.

10.26 Stipulated Order—Smith, Kerri Martha ( North Powder SD ) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts and Final Order of Reprimand for Kerri Martha Smith. The order imposes a Public Reprimand upon the licensure of Smith.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the North Powder School District of this action.

The Commission hereby adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of fact, conclusions of law and imposes a Public Reprimand upon the licensure of Kerri Martha Smith. This order shall serve as the Public Reprimand.

10.27 Stipulated Order—Stewart, Christopher John ( Eugene SD ) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Final Order of Reprimand and Probation for Christopher John Stewart. The order imposes a Public Reprimand upon Stewart and places him on probation for four (4) years subject to terms and conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Eugene School District of this action.

The Commission hereby adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of fact and conclusions of law and hereby imposes a Public Reprimand on Christopher John Stewart. This Order shall serve as the Public Reprimand.

Furthermore, the Commission places Mr. Stewart on Probation for a period of four (4) years probation subject to the following terms and conditions: 1. Mr. Stewart shall, at his own initiative and expense, continue to obtain treatment for his alcohol dependency as recommended by his alcohol treatment provider and abstain from the consumption of alcohol; 2. During the period of this probation, Mr. Stewart shall submit to the Executive Director of the Commission reports of his compliance with the aftercare treatment plan. Mr. Stewart shall provide these reports every six (6) months during his probation, on or before: February 4, 2007; August 4, 2007; February 4, 2008; August 4, 2008; February 4, 2009; August 4, 2009; February 4, 2010; and August 4, 2010. 3. Mr. Stewart shall report in writing within ten days to the Executive Director of the Commission any arrest or citation for any felony, misdemeanor, major traffic violation or violation of criminal probation; and 4. Mr. Stewart shall comply with the Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators under Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 584, Division 020.

Violation of any term or condition of probation shall constitute an independent basis for the Commission to revoke Mr. Stewart’s teaching license or otherwise impose discipline, after first providing Mr. Stewart with notice and opportunity for hearing.

10.28 Stipulated Order—Swift, Kevin Richard ( Central Curry SD ) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions. Approved as part of the Discipline Consent Agenda / Carried Absent / na The printed resolutions state:

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Final Order of Reprimand and Probation for Kevin Richard Swift. The order imposes a Public Reprimand upon Swift and places him on probation for two (2) years subject to a condition.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Central Curry School District of this action.

The Commission hereby adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of fact and imposes a Public Reprimand on Kevin Richard Swift. This Order shall serve as the Public Reprimand.

Furthermore, the Commission places Mr. Swift on Probation for a period of two (2) years from the date of this order, subject to the condition that he will comply with all Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators pursuant to Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 584, Division 020.

Violation of any of the terms of probation shall constitute an independent basis for the Commission to revoke Mr. Swift’s teaching license or otherwise impose discipline, after first providing Mr. Swift with notice and opportunity for hearing.

10.29 Stipulated Order—Verity, James Patrick ( Crook county SD ) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Order of Revocation and Probation for Jim P. Verity. The order imposes a revocation of Verity’s Initial Teaching License for one (1) year. At the end of the revocation period, Verity may apply for reinstatement pursuant to OAR 584-050-0015(4). If reinstated, Verity shall be placed on probation for a period of four (4) years subject to special terms and conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Crook County School District of this action.

The Commission adopts the above Stipulation of Facts, imposes a one (1) year revocation of Mr. Verity’s Initial Teaching License effective the date of this order. Pursuant to OAR 584- 050-0015(4), Mr. Verity may apply to the Commission for reinstatement of his teaching license on or after one (1) year from the date of this order.

Furthermore, if the license is reinstated, the Commission imposes a four (4) year probation upon Mr. Verity to commence the date of issuance of said license and subject to the following special terms and conditions of probation: 1. Mr. Verity shall participate in a Commission approved boundaries training program, successfully complete said program within the first year of the probation period and report in writing to the Executive Director; 2. Mr. Verity shall report to the Commission his compliance with the treatment plan every six (6) months during his probation, on or before: (Dates to be determined once license is reinstated); 3. Mr. Verity shall notify the Commission of any discipline imposed upon him by an employing school district for any reason during the term of this probation; 4. Mr. Verity shall report in writing within ten days to the Executive Director of the Commission any arrest or citation for any felony, misdemeanor, or major traffic violation; and 5. Mr. Verity shall comply with the Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators under Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 584, and Division 020.

Violation of any of the terms of probation shall constitute an independent basis for the Commission to revoke Mr. Verity’s teaching license or otherwise impose discipline, after first providing Mr. Verity with notice and opportunity for hearing. It is Mr. Verity’s duty to proactively seek termination of the probation at end of the four years.

10.30 Default Order—Wafer, Frederick “Chip” Albert ( Klamath Falls City SD ) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Default Order of License Suspension and Probation for Frederick “Chip” Albert Wafer. The order suspends Wafer’s Initial Administrator License and Standard Teaching License for a period of one (1) year. At the end of the suspension period, Wafer may apply for reinstatement pursuant to OAR 584-050- 0015(3). Upon reinstatement of licensure, Wafer shall be placed on probation for a period of one (1) year subject to conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Klamath Falls City School District and Prospect School District of this action.

Frederick “Chip” Albert Wafer’s Initial Administrator License and Standard Teaching License is suspended for a period of one (1) year effective August 4, 2006. At the end of this suspension period, Mr. Wafer’s Administrator License and Standard Teaching License will be reinstated upon submission of a complete application and fees pursuant to OAR 584- 050-0015(3).

Upon the reinstatement of licensure, Mr. Wafer shall be placed on probation by the Commission for a period of one year, subject to the following conditions: 1. Mr. Wafer shall comply with all Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators under Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 584, Division 020. 2. Mr. Wafer shall provide information as requested by the Commission to verify that he has complied with the conditions of probation, including a statement from a future employing district that he has complied with the Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators.

Violation of the terms of this probation may constitute an independent basis for the Commission to impose discipline, up to and including revocation of Mr. Wafer’s teaching license subject to Mr. Wafer’s right to a hearing on the issue of whether he violated probation. 10.31 Default Order—Woodruff, Kyle Aaron ( Malheur ESD ) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Default Order of License Revocation for Kyle Aaron Woodruff. The order revokes Woodruff’s Transitional Teaching License.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Malheur Education Service District of this action.

The Commission adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of fact and conclusions of law, and based thereon hereby revokes the Transitional Teaching License issued to Kyle Aaron Woodruff.

10.32 Stipulated Order—Ellars, Gregory Allan ( Portland SD ) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts and Final Order of Reprimand for Gregory Allan Ellars. The Order imposes a Public Reprimand upon Ellars.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Portland School District of this action.

The Commission hereby adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of facts and imposes a Public Reprimand upon the license of Gregory Allan Ellars. This Order shall serve as the Public Reprimand.

10.33 Stipulated Order—Manning, Terry Francis ( Silver Falls SD ) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Final Order of Reprimand and Probation for Terry Francis Manning. The order imposes a Public Reprimand upon Manning and places him on probation for three (3) years subject to conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Silver Falls School District of this action.

The Commission hereby adopts and incorporates herein the above findings of fact and imposes a Public Reprimand on Terry Francis Manning. This Order shall serve as the Public Reprimand. Furthermore, the Commission imposes a three (3) year probation upon Mr. Manning subject to the following conditions. The terms of probation are as follows: 1. By no later than October 15, 2006, Mr. Manning shall, seek evaluation by a psychotherapist, therapist or medical professional acceptable to the Commission. As part of his evaluation, Mr. Manning shall furnish a copy of this Order to the evaluator. 2. The evaluator shall submit to the Commission, a written report attesting that Mr. Manning is fit to work with children and that there is a high probability Mr. Manning will not repeat inappropriate physical contact with students in the future. The report will also state whether treatment is recommended by the provider. Mr. Manning shall submit to the Executive Director of the Commission reports of his compliance with the treatment plan if so recommended by the provider in subparagraph 1, above. Mr. Manning shall provide these reports every six (6) months during his probation, on or before: February 4, 2007; August 4, 2007; February 4, 2008; August 4, 2008; February 4, 2009; and August 4, 2009. 3. Mr. Manning shall comply with all Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance under Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 584, Division 020.

If Mr. Manning does not comply with his treatment plan based on the reports of his treatment provider or as otherwise determined by the Executive Director he shall be in violation of the terms of this probation. Violation of the terms of this probation may constitute an independent basis for the Commission to impose discipline, up to and including revocation of Mr. Manning’s teaching license subject to Mr. Manning’s right to a hearing on the issue of whether he violated probation.

11.0 DISIPLINE ISSUES CONSENT AGENDA The Executive Director recommends adoption by single consent motion the following listed items which are identified on the agenda by a double tilde “^^”. 10.1 through 10.10, and 10.12 through 10.22 and 10.24 through 10.33. Any of these items may be removed from the Consent Agenda upon the request of any Commissioner. Items removed from the Consent Agenda will be considered in the order they are listed on the agenda.

A request was made to remove 10.11, 10.12, 10.23 and 10.25 from the Discipline Consent Agenda.

MOTION, to accept the Discipline Consent Agenda with the removal of 10.11, 10.12, 10.23 and 10.25.

Moved by Pickard on behalf of Discipline / Carried

12.0 ANNOUNCEMENTS Chair: Just a reminder to the Commissioners, we need nominations for our Executive Committee. Debra Robinson is the Chair of the nomination committee. The State Board of Education has a high school diploma survey that we would like you fill out and turn in.

Comments were received from Retiring Commissioners...... Nancy Watt and Gary Peterson TSPC MINUTES August 2-4, 2006 Page 44

13.0 ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 3:00 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

______Kathleen Rogers, Program Assistant

Accepted

______Susan DeMarsh, Chairperson

*In action items, names are recorded for those Commissioners voting against the motion and for those absent or abstaining from voting. Those members not recorded as absent, opposed, or abstaining voted in favor of the respective motion.

**These minutes may not follow the actual time sequence in order of business, but follow the numerical order of the agenda for easy reference.