State Board of Education

1
Review and Revision of Instructional Materials
Adoption Process

• State Board of Education
• January 2014

2
Outline

• Informational update for the Board
• Oregon statutes and rules relating to
  instructional materials need to be revised to
  remove unnecessary regulations and enact
  supportive policies
• 2014 Initiate statewide workgroups to provide
  feedback on an improved process and draft new
  legislation
• 2015 Present new statutes to Oregon Legislature
  and update related administrative rules

3
Need to revise statutes and rules describing the
state adoption process

• Rationale for need to change our current Oregon
  state adoption process
• The current state adoption process requires
  publishers to pay for their materials to be
  reviewed, which creates an expensive process that
  may
• Preclude smaller publishers from engaging in the
  review process or
• Preclude some publishers from submitting all
  available materials
• Currently, the state can only review basal
  materials that are paid by the publisher to be
  reviewed on a seven year cycle, which would
  preclude the review of
• Supplemental materials (digital and/or print)
• Intervention programs
• Open Educational Resources (OER)
• New materials developed between review cycles
• Data is not collected to know what materials have
  been adopted off the list, or independently
  adopted in the state
• A better understanding of what materials are
  adopted in the state will help districts as they
  consider the purchase of new materials

4
Need to revise Oregon statutes and rules

• National reports, such as Choosing Blindly by
  the Brookings Institution, and Out of Print by
  State Educational Technology Directors
  Association (SETDA), strongly recommend states
  update their curricular review policies to keep
  up with changes in instructional materials
• Effectiveness research of curricular materials
  underscore their importance
• A thorough review of materials that results in
  identifying high quality curricula could
  potentially lead to significant gains in student
  achievement
• Effect size, in standard deviations, of selected
  interventions on student test scores

Source Choosing Blindly Instructional
Materials, Teacher Effectiveness, and the Common
Core, Brookings Institution (2012)
5
Significance of the proposed change

• Move to common standards means Oregon will need
  to adapt future adoption cycles to the
  development of shared standards
• We need to start the conversation today how such
  adoptions could look in the future
• A new process should take advantage of
  collaborative opportunities work with other
  states
• This spring, CCSSO is initiating discussions
  about a possible multi-state review
• Materials selection could impact student
  achievement as much as an effective teacher
• More attention should be given to ensuring our
  students and teachers have access to quality
  materials in a variety of available formats
  including digital and print options

6
District survey results Need to revise Oregon
statutes and rules

• ODE Staff Action
• Beginning in 2014, ODE staff to work to convene
  regional and statewide workgroups to provide
  feedback and draft revisions of Oregon
  instructional materials statutes to be presented
  in the 2015 legislative session
• Note Invitations were sent in January 2014 for
  districts to respond to the recommended actions
  and provide feedback. Twenty-eight districts
  within 12 ESD regions responded completed the
  survey.
• District survey summary for this recommended
  action
• 82 of respondents indicate they either Strongly
  Agree or Somewhat Agree with the given
  recommendation
• 14 of respondents indicate they are Neutral with
  the given recommendation
• 4 of respondents indicate they Somewhat Disagree
  with the given recommendation
• 0 of respondents indicate they Strongly Disagree
  with the given recommendation

7
Considerations to begin conversations at this time

• Key considerations guiding the start of this
  project
• A new process needs to include the review of
  digital and/or open educational materials (OER)
  on an adaptive review cycle
• A new process needs to minimize and/or remove
  barriers to publishers to encourage maximum
  participation of material submissions.
• A new process needs to address how materials
  developed both within and outside the state of
  Oregon could be leveraged by schools and
  districts.
• A new process needs to review materials that are
  both traditionally priced as well as newer
  purchasing arrangements such as subscriptions
  that would allow access to updated materials.
• A new process needs to help identify high quality
  basal, supplemental, and open source formats,
  which would include establishing relevant review
  criteria for Oregon districts.