Committee hears roundtable on KISA 2 accreditation, literacy training and district implementation

Legislative staff and a panel of superintendents, board members and education stakeholders briefed the Committee on Education on KISA 2, a proposed accreditation and continuous-improvement model that would require annual school- or district-level reviews, development of action plans and targeted assistance when performance does not improve.

The discussion focused on how accreditation criteria, assistance and timelines would work, how outcomes would be measured and what supports districts would need to implement improvement plans. Committee members asked for clearer definitions of measures, timelines for assistance and the role of state versus local control.

Elena Rudder of legislative research presented a table comparing surrounding states and other models, noting that as of January 2023 about 26 states had some form of accreditation system and roughly 20 required accreditation for public K-12 schools or districts. "Every state has an accountability system. Not every state has an accreditation system," she said, and listed options for accrediting agencies including state departments or outside agencies such as Cognia.

Randy Watson, Commissioner of Education, described KISA 2 as a streamlined, outcomes-focused model developed with the State Board of Education and local districts. "This is a streamlined version over the previous version," Watson said. "We've got rid of a lot of things and said, let's focus on what is really important to improve the outcomes of success for young people." He said the state intends to track multiple-year trends and that assistance teams could be deployed to districts that fail to show progress over time.

Watson and other speakers discussed structured-literacy training and the state's funding actions. Watson said the state board allocated up to $25,000,000 from federal COVID-relief (ESSER) set-aside funds to train teachers in the science of reading. "They appropriated to spend up to $25,000,000 to have everyone have that opportunity," Watson said.

District leaders described how KISA 2 aligned with local improvement plans. Stu Mackle, superintendent of Eudora Schools, said his district used the KISA 2 pilot to fold the model into its strategic plan and to create quarterly dashboards for the board. "For us, it's really become a guidepost for our board," Mackle said. Melanie Haas, State Board of Education member, said she appreciated the collaborative element and the model's focus on continuous growth rather than a "gotcha" system.

Committee members pressed for specifics. Representative Steele and others asked how many elementary teachers had completed LETRS (Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling) training in participating districts; Mackle said his district was "well over 50%" and another panelist said a district had more than 78% participation as of last spring. Members also asked whether accreditation categories would affect state funding; Rudder said Colorado's accreditation categories do not change funding levels but can prompt state board actions such as reorganization if accreditation is lost.

Several members raised concerns about teacher workload, retention and student behavior. Dahlia Schuman of the Kansas National Education Association urged compensation and time for teachers who are doing additional training and collaboration. "Our educators need to have time for collaborative preparation with their colleagues, that they're compensated for their time to go above and beyond the school day," she said. Superintendents described programs to address student behavior, including alternative therapeutic placements and wraparound services.

Representative Hill asked why the state should adopt an accreditation system if some states without state-run accreditation score higher on national assessments. Panelists responded that states separate "accountability" and "accreditation" functions differently and that KISA 2 is designed to combine targeted assistance with locally driven improvement strategies.

Representatives also asked about the "Blueprint for Literacy," a Board of Regents initiative intended to strengthen pre-service and in-service training in structured literacy. Representative Featherston said the legislature previously appropriated $10,000,000 for that work but said funding had been reduced to $2,200,000; panelists noted the blueprint is a Regents program and emphasized the importance of sustained funding for pre-service teacher preparation and for in-service retraining.

The committee did not take formal action on accreditation policy at the hearing but requested further detail on performance measures, timelines for intervention and the criteria the state board will use to classify districts and schools; members signaled they expect follow-up material and clearer standards before the legislature acts.