Recommendations

November 2016 School Library Services Vague State Laws and a Lack of Monitoring Allow School Districts to Provide a Minimal Level of Library Services Report 2016-112 COMMITMENT INTEGRITY LEADERSHIP CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR 621 Capitol Mall, Suite 1200 | Sacramento | CA | 95814 916.445.0255 | TTY 916.445.0033 For complaints of state employee misconduct, contact us through the Whistleblower Hotline: 1.800.952.5665 Don’t want to miss any of our reports? Subscribe to our email list at auditor.ca.gov For questions regarding the contents of this report, please contact Margarita Fernández, Chief of Public Affairs, at 916.445.0255 This report is also available online at www.auditor.ca.gov | Alternate format reports available upon request | Permission is granted to reproduce reports Elaine M. Howle State Auditor Doug Cordiner Chief Deputy November 17, 2016 2016-112 The Governor of California President pro Tempore of the Senate Speaker of the Assembly State Capitol Sacramento, California 95814 Dear Governor and Legislative Leaders: As requested by the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, the California State Auditor presents this audit report concerning school library services. State law requires school districts to provide library services to their students and teachers, but leaves the level of services provided to the discretion of school districts. In 2010 the State Board of Education adopted the Model School Library Standards for California Public Schools, Kindergarten Through Grade Twelve (model standards), which define educational goals for students at each grade level, including goals for information literacy. This report concludes that state law does not clearly define the minimum level of school library services school districts should provide. School districts can provide library services by employing teacher librarians, contracting for the provision of library services with county offices of education that employ teacher librarians, contracting with public libraries, which are not required to employ teacher librarians, or by limiting their provision of library services to certain types that do not require a teacher librarian. School districts in the counties we visited— Sacramento, San Bernardino, and Tulare—provide varying levels of library services to their students and teachers. One school district contracts with its county office of education, whereas the other two school districts employ teacher librarians, but place them only in the advanced grades. As a result, their students in lower grades receive fewer types of library services, and some may receive no more than access to library materials. In addition, state and county agencies have little authority to monitor the provision of library services when performing their oversight responsibilities. Although the Commission on Teacher Credentialing and the county offices of education we visited do monitor staffing assignments to verify that school districts employ or have access to certificated teacher librarians, they do not have express authority to assess whether districts actually provide library services. In addition, state law does not require county offices of education to ensure that their school districts consider the model standards when developing their local funding plans. As a result, school districts may be unaware that the model standards are one of the State’s academic content and performance standards, and thus they may fail to identify the needs of their school library programs. California has by far the poorest ratio of students to teacher librarians in the nation. In fiscal year 2013–14, California employed one teacher librarian for every 8,091 students while at the same time the national average was 1,109 students per teacher librarian. Although state law does not require school districts to employ teacher librarians, the model standards recommend employing one full-time teacher librarian for every 785 students. Finally, the number of individuals with active credentials authorizing them to provide library services has declined since fiscal year 2008–09. Thus, even schools that are interested in hiring teacher librarians may face difficulties in filling vacancies. Respectfully submitted, ELAINE M. HOWLE, CPA State Auditor 621 Capitol Mall, Suite 1200 Sacramento, CA 95814 916.445.0255 916.327.0019 fax www.auditor.ca.gov Blank page inserted for reproduction purposes only. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 v November 2016 Contents Summary 1 Introduction 7 Audit Results State Law Does Not Clearly Define Required Library Services or Establish the Means for Ensuring Their Provision 15 The Number of Teacher Librarians Employed Statewide Is Much Lower Than the State’s Adopted Standards Would Recommend 27 Recommendations 33 Responses to the Audit California Department of Education 37 California State Auditor’s Comments on the Response From the California Department of Education 43 Commission on Teacher Credentialing 45 California State Auditor’s Comments on the Response From the Commission on Teacher Credentialing 49 Redlands Unified School District 51 California State Auditor’s Comment on the Response From the Redlands Unified School District 53 Sacramento County Office of Education 55 California State Auditor’s Comments on the Response From the Sacramento County Office of Education 57 San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools 59 California State Auditor’s Comments on the Response From the San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools 63 San Juan Unified School District 65 Tulare County Office of Education 67 Woodlake Unified School District 69 California State Auditor’s Comment on the Response From the Woodlake Unified School District 71 vi California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 Blank page inserted for reproduction purposes only. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 1 November 2016 Summary Results in Brief Audit Highlights . . . California’s common core standards for K–12 schools state that Our audit of the provision of school library students must be able to gather, comprehend, evaluate, synthesize, services highlighted the following: and summarize information and ideas effectively to be ready for » School districts provide varying levels college, workforce training, and life in a technological society. As of library services to their students a result, students must learn how to transform isolated bits of and teachers. information into knowledge, evaluate sources, and think critically. State law authorizes teacher librarians—credentialed educators with • The districts we visited in two counties specialized education—to teach students these skills in the subject employ teacher librarians, but place known as information literacy, through instruction provided as part them only in advanced grades. of schools’ library services. In 2010 the State Board of Education • In another county, the districts (State Education Board) adopted the Model School Library contract with the county office of Standards for California Public Schools, Kindergarten Through education for the library services; Grade Twelve (model standards), which define educational goals for however, that office employs only students at each grade level, including goals for information literacy. one teacher librarian who serves more than 100 schools across two counties. State law requires school districts to provide library services, but it does not clearly define them, so districts may provide varying levels » There is no oversight at the State or of service. For example, one school district may choose to provide county level for ensuring that schools do its students and teachers only with access to library materials, not assign classified staff to perform the whereas another school district may choose to also provide authorized duties of a teacher librarian. students with instruction in information literacy and research skills in accordance with the model standards. School districts can • Many of the schools we visited use provide library services by employing teacher librarians, contracting classified staff who are not certificated for the provision of library services with county offices of education to provide certain library services. that employ teacher librarians, contracting with public libraries that » The California Department of Education are not required to employ teacher librarians, or using classified has not gathered the needed data staff to provide only certain types of library services.1 to assess the extent to which schools provide library services or implement the School library programs in the counties we visited—Sacramento, model standards. San Bernardino, and Tulare—provide varying levels of library services to their students and teachers. The districts we visited in » Although the model standards the counties of Sacramento and San Bernardino employ teacher recommend school districts employ librarians, but they place them only in the advanced grades. As one full-time teacher librarian for a result, students in lower grades receive fewer types of library every 785 students, California school services, and some may receive no more than access to educational districts reported employing one teacher materials. Without the foundation of skills and knowledge librarian for every 7,414 students in established in earlier grades, students and teachers may not be able fiscal year 2014–15. to achieve the goals of the model standards for later grades. » California has the poorest ratio of students to teacher librarians in the nation. 1 Certificated personnel, such as administrators, teachers, and teacher librarians, are employees who have obtained valid certifications or credentials licensing them to provide designated school services. The term classified staff refers to other school employees who work in positions not requiring certification, such as instructional aides, library technicians, and clerical staff. 2 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 In Tulare County, the district we visited contracts with the Tulare County Office of Education (Tulare County Education) for library services; however, Tulare County Education employs only one teacher librarian who serves more than 100 schools across two counties, thus limiting the level of service she can provide to individual schools. Although the State’s Commission on Teacher Credentialing (Teacher Credentialing) has issued guidance that this practice is one way to comply with state law, schools that obtain services in this way are unlikely to provide as many library services to their students and teachers as schools that employ their own teacher librarians. The district’s administrators stated that they were satisfied with the services they receive from Tulare County Education and that they believe that classroom teachers provide sufficient lessons on information literacy and research. However, a district can better ensure the consistency and quality of such lessons in meeting the state standards if it employs at its schools teacher librarians who are specifically trained in these subjects. In addition, neither the California Department of Education (Education), Teacher Credentialing, nor county offices of education are responsible for ensuring that schools do not assign classified staff to perform the authorized duties of a teacher librarian. Many of the schools we visited provide library services using classified staff who are not certificated to perform specific duties reserved only for credentialed teacher librarians, such as selecting library materials. However, Teacher Credentialing and the county offices of education we visited stated that they did not identify this activity as an inappropriately staffed position, referred to as a misassignment, because they lack the authority to monitor the assignments of classified staff. As a result, they only assess whether districts fill at least one teacher librarian position with an individual holding the appropriate credential instead of monitoring who provides those services at all of the schools. However, we compared Teacher Credentialing’s and Education’s data and identified 111 individuals whom districts reported as employed teacher librarians between fiscal years 2010–11 and 2014–15 but whom we identified as appearing to lack the requisite credential or permit at some point during that period. Because state law gives Teacher Credentialing broad authority to ensure competence in the teaching profession and to establish sanctions for the misuse of credentials and misassignment of credential holders, it could perform a similar electronic comparison to identify and follow up on employees without proper authorization who may be performing library services that require a teacher librarian credential. Further, the county offices of education we visited do little to ensure that their school districts consider the model standards when developing their local funding plans because state law does California State Auditor Report 2016-112 3 November 2016 not require the county offices of education to do so as part of the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) review process. State law requires school districts to use the State Education Board’s adopted template to address the implementation of academic content and performance standards within their local control accountability plans (LCAPs) by including a description of their annual goals for students’ achievement. In addition, the county offices of education are responsible for reviewing and approving the LCAPs of school districts within their jurisdiction, but county offices of education are only allowed to ensure that districts’ LCAPs adhere to the template. Although Education identifies the model standards as one of the State’s academic content and performance standards, the template does not list any of the standards that school districts must address. As a result, school districts may be unaware that the model standards are one of the State’s recommended academic content and performance standards, and thus they may fail to identify the needs of their school library programs. Furthermore, Education has been unsuccessful in gathering data on the extent of library services that school districts provide throughout the State. State law requires school districts to report annually on the condition of their school libraries to Education, so Education developed an annual library survey to facilitate this requirement. However, Education did not design the survey to assess the extent to which schools provide library services or have implemented the model standards. For example, the survey only gathers limited information on library instruction, curriculum development, and professional development. In addition, since fiscal year 2008–09, fewer than half of the State’s schools have participated in the survey. Without this information, Education cannot assess the extent of library services students are receiving. Moreover, because of recent changes to its data collection process, Education cannot use the data it collected in fiscal year 2015–16 to accurately identify the number of teacher librarians employed statewide. According to Education’s deputy superintendent of the District, School, and Innovation Branch (branch deputy), Education instructed districts about the recent changes by updating its data guide and providing multiple California Longitudinal Pupils Achievement Data System (CALPADS) trainings. However, the branch deputy explained that it is clear many districts did not understand the changes. Education plans to address the problems this lack of understanding could cause in the fiscal year 2016–17 data by providing training and emphasizing the issue in its CALPADS information meeting this fall. Without data on the conditions and staffing of school library programs, state decision makers cannot identify the weaknesses in the programs and develop solutions to address them. 4 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 School districts throughout the State do not employ enough teacher librarians on average to meet the staffing levels recommended in the model standards. The model standards recommend staffing based on student enrollment; however, the school districts we visited only employ teacher librarians to serve certain grade levels or they contract with a public agency that provides library services to a large number of schools. According to the model standards’ goal, the State’s school districts should employ a total of about 7,900 teacher librarians to serve the 6.2 million students enrolled in schools statewide. The model standards recommend having one full-time teacher librarian for every 785 students; however, in fiscal year 2014–15, California school districts reported employing only one teacher librarian on average for every 7,414 students, for a total of 841 teacher librarians statewide. Moreover, the number of individuals with active credentials authorizing them to provide library services has declined since fiscal year 2008–09, possibly because teacher librarians do not always earn additional pay and are particularly susceptible to budget cuts. Thus, even schools that are interested in hiring teacher librarians may face difficulties in filling vacancies. California has the poorest ratio of students to teacher librarians in the nation, and unless it makes changes to increase the number of teacher librarians, its school library programs will continue to lag behind those of other states. Based on the most recent national data on teacher librarians, California employed only one teacher librarian for every 8,091 students in fiscal year 2013–14, while the state with the next poorest ratio, Idaho, employed one teacher librarian for every 5,533 students. At the same time, the national average was around 1,100 students per teacher librarian. We reviewed four states with large student populations and noted that the largest school districts within two of those states provided greater monetary incentives to their teacher librarians than the largest California school district—Los Angeles Unified. School districts in California may find it difficult to afford a student-to-teacher librarian ratio similar to that of other states because California spends less than the nationwide average per student, even though the cost of living in California is generally higher than that of most other states. Thus, the general lack of financial support for education may, in part, be hindering school districts from employing and retaining more teacher librarians. Further, some states have laws that require school districts to employ a teacher librarian based on school size or grade level. For example, New York has a state mandate requiring the employment of one full-time teacher librarian for every 1,000 students in secondary schools. By establishing a state mandate on the staffing of teacher librarians, states demonstrate that they value library California State Auditor Report 2016-112 5 November 2016 services as a fundamental part of education. Unless California makes changes to increase the number of teacher librarians employed statewide, its employment of teacher librarians will likely continue to trail the rest of the nation. Key Recommendations To ensure that students receive a level of library services that better aligns with the model standards, the Legislature should do the following: • Define the minimum level and types of library services that schools must provide. • Broaden the authority of Teacher Credentialing and the county offices of education to address classified staff who perform duties that require a certification. To strengthen their library programs and help the State assess the condition of school libraries statewide, the school districts we visited in the counties of Sacramento, San Bernardino, and Tulare should do the following: • Use the model standards to assess the needs of their school library programs and address any identified needs during their LCAP process. • Require their schools to participate in Education’s annual school library survey. To strengthen school library programs in their counties and help school districts comply with state law, the Sacramento, San Bernardino, and Tulare county offices of education should provide guidance to their school districts on using teacher librarians for the provision of library services, completing Education’s annual school library survey, and identifying the needs of their school library programs by using the model standards as part of their LCAP process. To strengthen its monitoring of staff assignments, Teacher Credentialing should work with Education to identify potential misassignments by comparing annually the staffing information reported by school districts to Education against Teacher Credentialing’s credentialing records. Further, Teacher Credentialing should incorporate the identified misassignments into its existing notification, reporting, and sanctioning structure. 6 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 To better understand the condition of school libraries statewide and to raise stakeholders’ awareness of the State Education Board’s adopted model standards, Education should do the following: • Redesign its annual school library survey to solicit answers that will better help Education determine whether schools are implementing the model standards and better assess the type and extent of library services the schools provide. • Use its directory of school districts to notify administrators about the annual school library survey and remind them that participation is mandatory. • Work with Teacher Credentialing to assist it in identifying potential misassignments by providing staffing information reported by school districts to Teacher Credentialing by April of each academic year. • Work with the State Education Board to incorporate consideration of all academic content and performance standards adopted by the State Education Board into the tools that guide the LCFF process, including but not limited to the LCAP template. Agency Comments The entities we reviewed generally agreed with our findings and conclusions, and indicated they will take actions to implement our recommendations. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 7 November 2016 Introduction Background California’s common core standards for K–12 schools state that students need the ability to gather, comprehend, evaluate, synthesize, and summarize information and ideas to be ready for college, workforce training, and life in a technological society. According to the American Library Association, librarians are uniquely qualified to teach students how to transform isolated bits of information into knowledge, how to evaluate sources, and how to think critically. Students in grades K–12 can learn these skills, known as information literacy, through instruction that teacher librarians provide as part of public schools’ library services. State law requires school districts to provide their students and teachers with library services, which Definition of Library Services we describe in the text box. School districts may provide library services by employing teacher School library services include, but are not limited to, the librarians, who are credentialed educators with provision, organization, and utilization of materials and specialized education and training in the provision related activities supportive of the educational requirements prescribed by law and by the school districts, which may of library services. School districts may also provide include the following: services by contracting with their county offices of education if those offices employ teacher librarians • Library Instruction—Provide instruction to students that or by contracting with public libraries, which do will enable them to become proficient users of library not need to employ teacher librarians. In addition, resources; provide in-service training for teachers. school districts may use classified staff, such as • Curriculum Development—Provide information to teaching assistants, library aides, and clerical staff, teachers and administrators concerning sources and to provide students with certain library services availability of instructional materials that will aid in the that do not fall within the list of duties that require development of school curriculum; team with classroom a credentialed teacher librarian, as described in teachers to develop units of instruction and activities using the text box on the following page. However, the library resources in the instructional programs. employment of classified staff cannot be intended • Materials Selection—Provide assistance to teachers to supersede the requirement to include teacher and students in the evaluation, selection, production, and librarians in the coordination and implementation uses of instructional materials. of public school library programs. • Access to Materials and Information Resources— Provide a collection of materials and resources that support Although school districts are not required to the curriculum and are appropriate for user needs; plan a directly employ teacher librarians to provide functional system, procedures, and services for maximum library services, teacher librarians are trained and utilization of resources. authorized to provide students and teachers with a • Professional Development—Assist teachers, broad range of library services that noncertificated administrators, and other school staff members in staff cannot provide, such as instruction on becoming knowledgeable and current concerning information literacy. To become a teacher librarian, appropriate uses of library media services, materials, an individual must first obtain a valid teaching and equipment. credential before completing an additional Source: California Code of Regulations, Title 5, Section 16040. credentialing program approved by the Commission on Teacher Credentialing (Teacher Credentialing). Four California universities offer 8 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 such credentialing programs: California State University, Long Beach; San José State University; Azusa Pacific University; and Fresno Pacific University. In certain cases, a certificated teacher without a teacher librarian credential may provide Authorized Duties of the full range of library services if that teacher holds Credentialed Teacher Librarians an emergency teacher librarian services permit (emergency permit) or possesses legacy teaching Teacher librarians and individuals with permits and credentials; however, these legacy credentials credentials allowing for the provision of library services may generally have not been issued since 1994. The do the following: emergency permit requires a formal commitment • Instruct students in accessing, evaluating, using to complete a teacher librarian credential program and integrating information and resources in the and can only be renewed twice, allowing a library program. maximum of three years of emergency service. • Plan and coordinate school library programs with the instructional programs of a school district through Local and State Responsibilities collaboration with teachers. • Select materials for school and district libraries. County offices of education support school • Develop programs for and deliver staff development for districts by performing tasks that can be done school library services. more efficiently at the county level. For example, • Coordinate or supervise library programs at the school, a county office of education may provide library district, or county level. services to school districts that contract with it for those services. State law requires county offices • Plan and conduct a course of instruction for those pupils of education to monitor teacher assignments at a who assist in the operation of school libraries. selection of school districts annually, covering all • Supervise classified personnel assigned school school districts within their jurisdictions at least library duties. every four years. When a county office of education • Develop procedures for and management of the school identifies a misassignment—someone who is and district libraries. not properly certificated for his or her assigned position—it must notify the district’s administration Sources: California Code of Regulations, Title 5, Section 80053 (b); the Commission on Teacher Credentialing’s (Teacher that the district has 30 days to resolve the issue. Credentialing) Administrator’s Assignment Manual, and If the misassignment is not corrected or explained, Teacher Credentialing’s guidance on Emergency Teacher the county office of education must report it to Librarian Services Permits. Teacher Credentialing within 30 days. The county offices of education must also annually report to Teacher Credentialing the number and type of misassignments they identified and whether the school districts resolved those misassignments, among other things. Teacher Credentialing monitors teacher assignments in counties with a single school district and reports biennially to the Legislature information on teacher assignments and misassignments statewide. Teacher Credentialing is also the state agency responsible for issuing and revoking teaching credentials, issuing emergency permits, and promulgating regulations related to credentialing. Accordingly, it provides guidance on interpreting state law related to credentialing requirements and to the authorized duties of credentialed teachers, such as teacher librarians. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 9 November 2016 The California Department of Education (Education) is, among other things, responsible for receiving reports on the conditions and staffing of school libraries statewide. State law requires the State Board of Education (State Education Board)—California’s governing and policy-making body on education—to adopt standards and regulations related to school library services. These regulations define school library services and the duties of library personnel. In addition, state law requires school districts to annually report to Education on the condition of their libraries for a comparative study of school library conditions in the State. Education assists school districts by annually administering an online library survey that asks the schools about their libraries’ accessibility and resources, such as hours of operation and the age of their book collections. Education employs a library consultant who is available to assist the schools in completing the survey and who compiles the survey results for public use on Education’s website. In addition to the survey, Education collects other education data, such as enrollment counts, number of graduates, and the number of teacher librarians employed statewide. Education obtains this information from school districts annually for reporting purposes and makes the information available to stakeholders at all levels throughout the State. Example of the Model School Library Standards’ Standards for Library Services Educational Goals for Evaluating the Relevance of Information for Selected Grades The State Education Board adopted the Model School Grade Four Library Standards for California Public Schools, • Extract and record appropriate and significant Kindergarten Through Grade Twelve (model information from the text. standards) in 2010 to guide school districts in implementing strong library programs and to raise Grades Seven and Eight student achievement. The model standards establish • Assess the author’s evidence to support claims and educational goals for students at each grade level assertions, noting instances of bias and stereotypes in a and describe the minimum staffing and resources variety of visual and audio materials. required for effective school library programs. The • Evaluate the sources for fact, opinion, propaganda, model standards delineate a program for information currency, and relevance. literacy instruction that encompasses both primary and secondary education, and they provide Grades Nine Through Twelve grade-level standards that address the evaluation • Evaluate online search results, demonstrating an of information in text and other sources. understanding of how search engines determine rank or relevancy. The model standards organize the State’s • Analyze important ideas and supporting evidence in educational goals into four main concepts: an information source by using logic and informed accessing information, evaluating information, judgment to accept or reject information. using information, and integrating information • Interpret meaning from charts, maps, graphs, tables, literacy skills into all areas of learning. Within those and pictures. four concepts, the model standards define specific educational goals under 13 overarching standards Source: Model School Library Standards for California Public Schools, Kindergarten Through Grade Twelve. that continue across all grade levels. The model standards then separate those goals into smaller, 10 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 more specific objectives that students should achieve by the end of a specified grade level or grade span, such as the span of grades nine through twelve in high school. For example, to evaluate information and determine its relevance—Standard 2.1—elementary, middle, and high school students should learn the skills described in the text box on the previous page. To accomplish these objectives, the model standards make recommendations regarding the staffing, accessibility, responsibilities, and resources of the library and teacher librarian. Moreover, according to Education, the model standards align with the State’s common core standards. However, compliance with the model standards is not required, so they constitute guidance, not a mandate. State Funding for Library Services Since fiscal year 1998–99, the State has funded school libraries through a variety of models, with annual amounts ranging from as much as $159 million in fiscal year 1998–99 down to $4.2 million in fiscal year 2004–05. Under the current model, districts decide how best to spend school funding to meet their identified needs. Figure 1 shows the history of the State’s funding of school libraries and its transition to a local model. Figure 1 Timeline of State Funding for Library Services Fiscal Years 1998–99 Through 2013–14 Fiscal Years Fiscal Year 2005–06: Fiscal Year 2013–14: 1998–99 to 2001–02: Implementation of the School and Implementation of the Local California Public School Library Act Library Improvement Block Grant Control Funding Formula (LCFF) and went into effect. Statewide funding (SLIBG), which combined funding from elimination of SLIBG. LCFF allows for school libraries totaled about the California Public School Library Act funds to be spent at the discretion $158.8 million annually. with funding from the School of local educational agencies. Improvement Program. 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 2002–03 2003–04 2004–05 2005–06 2006–07 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 Fiscal Years Fiscal Years Fiscal Years 2002–03 to 2004–05: 2005–06 to 2007–08: 2008–09 to 2012–13: Funding reduced to Total apportionments equaled SLIBG funding became $21.1 million in fiscal $422.4 million in fiscal year unrestricted and could be used year 2002–03, $8.8 million 2005–06, $447.4 million in for any educational purpose. in fiscal year 2003–04, fiscal year 2006–07, and and $4.2 million in fiscal $465.5 million in fiscal year 2004–05. year 2007–08.* Sources: Education Code sections 2574, 18180-18184, 41570-41571, and 42605; California State Auditor’s analysis of California Department of Education (Education) records of annual apportionments for library programs; the California Budget Act for fiscal years 2005–06, 2006–07, 2007–08, and 2013–14; and the fiscal year 2014–15 Governor’s budget. * State law defining the SLIBG did not specify spending requirements for library purposes. However, Education reported that $23 million was used for library functions in fiscal year 2005–06. Education did not report any estimates for fiscal years 2006–07 and 2007–08. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 11 November 2016 In fiscal year 2013–14, California adopted the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), which replaced the previous funding model. This new process requires school districts to develop local control accountability plans (LCAP), in which they must describe their goals and allocate resources to achieve those goals. A district’s LCAP goals must align with the State’s eight priority areas, which include proper teacher assignments, standards implementation, and student outcomes, among others. As part of the priority area on the implementation of standards, Education instructs districts to address how they will implement the State Education Board’s adopted academic content and performance standards, which include the model standards. County offices of education are required to approve their school districts’ local funding plans if, among other things, they adhere to the State Education Board’s template. In addition, state law requires the State Education Board to develop an accountability tool, known as the evaluation rubrics, that includes state and local performance standards for all LCFF priorities and that, among other things, assists school districts in identifying strengths, weaknesses, and areas in need of improvement for school districts and schools. The State Education Board adopted its evaluation rubrics in September 2016. Scope and Methodology The Joint Legislative Audit Committee (Audit Committee) directed the California State Auditor to determine how well school districts and county offices of education are providing library services to students and if a sufficient number of teacher librarians are employed within the State. We list the objectives that the Audit Committee approved and the methods used to address them in Table 1. Table 1 Audit Objectives and the Methods Used to Address Them AUDIT OBJECTIVE METHOD 1 Review and evaluate the laws, rules and We reviewed relevant laws, rules, regulations, and other background materials. regulations significant to the audit objectives. 2 Evaluate the policies, procedures, and For Education and Teacher Credentialing, we did the following: practices at the California Department of • Interviewed staff and reviewed memos, policies, and procedures regarding guidance to Education (Education) and the Commission school districts and county offices of education related to teacher librarians. on Teacher Credentialing (Teacher • Determined whether Education had waived any requirements for library services and whether Credentialing) related to library media it worked together with Teacher Credentialing to ensure the provision of library services. teachers, also known as teacher librarians. Education has not waived any requirements related to the provision of library services. In Determine whether Education and Teacher addition, Education and Teacher Credentialing staff do not have a formal relationship specific Credentialing effectively guide school to the provision of library services. districts and county offices of education in complying with applicable laws, rules, and regulations. continued on next page . . . 12 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 AUDIT OBJECTIVE METHOD 3 For a selection of school districts and the We selected the counties of Sacramento, San Bernardino, and Tulare based on geography, corresponding county offices of education, student population, percentage of free or reduced price lunches, responses to the Education determine the following: survey, and the number of teacher librarians. From those counties, we selected San Juan Unified School District (San Juan Unified), Redlands Unified School District (Redlands Unified), and Woodlake Unified School District (Woodlake Unified) based on comparable school district types and average rates of free or reduced price lunches for their students. a. Whether the district and county offices For the selected school districts and counties, we did the following: are complying with laws, rules, and • Interviewed executive staff at the school district and county offices of education to regulations related to credentialed determine how they provide library services. teacher librarians and the provision • Reviewed their policies, procedures, and records to determine whether they complied with of library services. applicable laws, rules, and regulations. • For a selection of schools with no teacher librarians, interviewed school site administrators to determine how they provide library services. • Interviewed classified library staff and reviewed their job duty statements to determine whether they included responsibilities restricted to credentialed teacher librarians. b. Whether the district or corresponding For each selected district and county office of education that employs teacher librarians, we did county office of education employs a the following: credentialed teacher librarian and, if so, • Interviewed a selection of teacher librarians and their school site administrators to whether that individual provides library determine the extent to which the schools provide library services. services to one or more other districts in • For teacher librarians in each district and county office of education, we determined whether the county. Note any instances in which the teacher librarians’ credentials were valid. All of the teacher librarians we reviewed had valid neither the district nor the county office of credentials during their employment. education employs any teacher librarians and determine the reasons they do not. c. For each selected district, determine how • We obtained current employment contracts each district has with teacher librarians and many schools within the district receive identified the number of schools they serve. With the exception of Redlands Unified’s services from a credentialed teacher middle school teacher librarian (middle school librarian), we noted that all of the teacher librarian and the frequency with which librarians in the districts we visited are employed full time at their assigned schools. they are provided. In addition, determine As we discuss in the Audit Results, the middle school librarian splits her time equally at how many schools receive services four school sites. from a city or county public library and • We worked with county offices of education to identify school districts that contract with their frequency. public libraries for services. The county offices of education we visited do not formally track which school districts contract with public libraries for the provision of library services. None of our selected school districts contract for library services with public libraries; however, we reviewed the contracts of two school districts that do. The contracts did not specify the number of schools that receive services from city or county public libraries nor did they identify the frequency of the services the libraries provide. d. If the school district contracted with a None of our selected school districts contract for library services with public libraries; however, city or county public library to provide two county offices of education identified school districts that contract with public libraries for school librarian services, determine the provision of library services. One of the contracts specifies that the public library staff will whether that contract required staffing by provide services that overlap with a teacher librarian’s authorized duties, but it does not require a credentialed teacher librarian or another the public library to employ teacher librarians. Because state law allows public libraries to individual meeting Teacher Credentialing’s provide library services without expressly requiring them to employ a teacher librarian, we did professional requirement for credentialed not consider this an exception. teacher librarians. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 13 November 2016 AUDIT OBJECTIVE METHOD 4 To the extent possible, identify the total • We obtained data from Education to identify the total number of teacher librarians number of teacher librarians employed employed statewide. by school districts and county offices of • We reviewed Education staff’s methodology for calculating the ratio of students to teacher education in California. If the number librarians in its annual report. We noted that Education staff exclude certain school types from of credentialed teacher librarians is its calculation to provide a snapshot of school libraries in traditional school settings. This did not insufficient based on available indicators, result in a significant difference, so we did not consider this an exception. determine what factors contribute to • We interviewed Teacher Credentialing and Education staff to identify best practice models the shortage. or studies. We reviewed those models and studies to identify indicators of a shortage of teacher librarians. • We obtained credentialing data from Teacher Credentialing to determine whether a sufficient number of teacher librarians are being credentialed to achieve the staffing levels that the State’s adopted standards recommend. • We reviewed the State’s historical funding of school library programs. • We interviewed administrators at credentialing institutions throughout the State. 5 Review and assess any other issues that are We obtained Education and Teacher Credentialing perspectives on Mariposa County Office significant to the audit. of Education’s (Mariposa County Education) contract with Merced County for the provision of library services and Mariposa County Education’s statement indicating that it did not intend to use its contract for library services. Sources: California State Auditor’s analysis of Joint Legislative Audit Committee audit request 2016-112 and data obtained from Education; Teacher Credentialing; the county offices of education of Sacramento, San Bernardino, and Tulare; and the school districts of Redlands Unified, San Juan Unified, and Woodlake Unified. Assessment of Data Reliability In performing this audit, we obtained electronic data files extracted from the information systems listed in Table 2 on the following page. The U.S. Government Accountability Office, whose standards we are statutorily required to follow, requires us to assess the sufficiency and appropriateness of computer-processed information that we use to support findings, conclusions, or recommendations. Table 2 describes the analyses we conducted using data from these information systems, our methods for testing, and the results of our assessments. Although these determinations may affect the precision of the numbers we present, there is sufficient evidence in total to support our audit findings, conclusions, and recommendations. 14 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 Table 2 Methods Used to Assess Data Reliability INFORMATION SYSTEM PURPOSE METHOD AND RESULT CONCLUSION Commission on To determine the number We performed data-set verification procedures and Not sufficiently reliable Teacher Credentialing of individuals authorized to found no errors. Further, we performed electronic for these audit purposes. (Teacher Credentialing) provide library services by testing of key data elements and did not identify any Although this determination type from fiscal years 2008–09 material errors. We reviewed existing information may affect the precision of Credentialing Automation through 2015–16. to determine what is already known about the data the numbers we present, System Enterprise (CASE) and found that prior audit results indicate there sufficient evidence exists as of June 2016 To identify the credentials are pervasive weaknesses in the general controls in total to support our for a selection of teacher over Teacher Credentialing’s information systems. audit findings, conclusions, librarians as of June 2016. In addition, we identified a limitation in Teacher and recommendations. Credentialing’s data. CASE contains credentials that are issued for the life of a holder. Teacher Credentialing generally stopped issuing these life credentials over 30 years ago in 1985. Further, holders are not required to report employment data to Teacher Credentialing; therefore, it does not update CASE to reflect the work availability of individuals with life credentials—such as whether the individual is currently employed, retired, or deceased. Because of this data limitation, we excluded nearly 8,200 individuals with life credentials from our analysis. California Department of To identify teacher librarians We performed data-set verification procedures and Undetermined reliability Education (Education) employed from fiscal electronic testing of key data elements and did for these audit purposes. years 2010–11 through not identify significant issues. We did not perform Although this determination California Longitudinal Pupil 2014–15. accuracy or completeness testing on these data may affect the precision of Achievement Data System because the source documentation is located at the numbers we present, (CALPADS) as of June 2016 To determine the multiple locations throughout the State, making sufficient evidence exists student-to-teacher librarian such testing cost-prohibitive. To gain some assurance in total to support our ratio in the State and for of the completeness of the data, we traced the audit findings, conclusions, select entities for fiscal universe of teacher librarians employed in fiscal and recommendations. year 2014–15. year 2014–15 at select counties and school districts we visited to the CALPADS data. We identified no exceptions through this testing. Sources: California State Auditor’s analysis of various documents, interviews, and data from the entities listed in this table. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 15 November 2016 Audit Results State Law Does Not Clearly Define Required Library Services or Establish the Means for Ensuring Their Provision State law requires K–12 public school districts to provide school library services, but it broadly defines library services without identifying the specific minimum services districts must provide. In addition, state law requires the State Board of Education (State Education Board) to establish standards for library services; however, the standards it adopted are not enforceable. Because the State has no clearly defined requirements for library services, we were not surprised to find that the school districts and county offices of education we visited use different approaches and provide varying levels of library services. Further, because state and county agencies do little to monitor the provision of library services, the State lacks adequate data to assess the effectiveness of school library programs statewide, and students and teachers at some schools may be receiving inferior services. State Law Does Not Specify the Minimum Level of Library Services School Districts Must Provide State law does not clearly define the minimum level of services that school districts must provide, so the districts provide varying levels of library services to their students and teachers. According to state law, a school district may provide library services by employing a teacher librarian, employing classified library staff to perform basic library operations, contracting with a county office of education that employs a teacher librarian, or contracting with a city or county public library, which is not required to employ a teacher librarian.2 Although state law does not specify the level or type of library services districts must provide, the State Education Board adopted the Model School Library Standards for California Public Schools, Kindergarten Through Grade Twelve (model standards) in 2010; these model standards define educational standards for students at each grade level and describe minimum expectations for the level of library staffing and resources needed to ensure that the students will achieve these standards. However, the program guidelines that the State Education Board issues are not prescriptive, and state law requires the California Department of Education (Education) to notify school districts that compliance with the model standards is not mandatory. In the counties we selected for review—Sacramento, 2 Certificated personnel, such as administrators, teachers, and teacher librarians, are employees who have obtained a valid certification or credential licensing them to provide designated school services. The term classified staff refers to school employees who work in positions not requiring certification, such as instructional aides, library technicians, and clerical staff. 16 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 San Bernardino, and Tulare—the schools we visited provided students with access to library materials; however, their provision of additional types of library services varied significantly. State law defines library services as including, but not limited to, the provision, organization, and utilization of materials and related activities. It presents five types of services that may be included under library services but does not expressly require any of them. As a result, school districts can choose to provide services that do not require extensive teacher librarian involvement. For example, schools may use classified staff to provide their students and teachers access to materials, such as books, while limiting the use of teacher librarians to professional services, such as the selection of materials. Most of the schools in the districts we visited do not regularly employ teacher librarians on-site in their libraries; instead, they rely on classified library staff to operate the libraries. The schools that do employ teacher librarians generally provide more types of library services to their students and teachers than those that do not, as shown in Table 3. Although the model standards establish educational goals for all grades K–12, the school districts we visited generally provide fewer types of library services to students in their elementary and middle schools than to students in their high schools. For example, San Juan Unified School District (San Juan Unified) in Sacramento County employs teacher librarians at each of its nine traditional high schools, but none at any of its elementary and middle schools. Because certificated teacher librarians are the only staff allowed to provide certain types of library services, San Juan Unified’s elementary and middle school students and teachers receive fewer types of library services, with those services generally focusing on access to library materials. Although the high schools’ teacher librarians could theoretically provide additional services to the elementary and middle schools, the director of the district’s human resources certified team stated that the teacher librarians are dedicated full-time to their assigned high schools. One teacher librarian explained that because the district does not assign dedicated library aides to the high school libraries, the teacher librarians are required to stay at their assigned locations to keep the libraries open. She stated that the teacher librarians can therefore only offer sporadic assistance to elementary and middle school libraries. This approach may affect the success of some students entering high school. According to the teacher librarian, she tested freshmen in high school to measure their knowledge of information literacy and noted that their scores were quite low. However, the model standards establish educational goals for elementary grade levels with the expectation that students will master the goals for previous grades as they advance in school. Without the foundation of skills and knowledge established in earlier grades, students may not be able to achieve the goals of the model standards for higher grades. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 17 November 2016 3 elbaT sloohcS detceleS ta smargorP yrarbiL yb dedivorP secivreS fo sepyT YTNUOC ERALUT YTNUOC ONIDRANREB NAS YTNUOC OTNEMARCAS DEIFINU EKALDOOW TCIRTSID LOOHCS TCIRTSID LOOHCS DEIFINU SDNALDER TCIRTSID LOOHCS DEIFINU NAUJ NAS EKALDOOW DNALHGIH NOTFARC EROOM OYAD LED NAVLYS ONIMAC LE ELDDIM YELLAV EKALDOOW EVORG YRATNEMELE ELDDIM SDNALDER YRATNEMELE ELDDIM LATNEMADNUF OPMAC LED LOOHCS LOOHCS HGIH YRATNEMELE LOOHCS LOOHCS LOOHCS HGIH LOOHCS LOOHCS LOOHCS HGIH LOOHCS HGIH SECIVRES YRARBIL FO EPYT noitcurtsnI yrarbiL emoceb ot meht elbane lliw taht stneduts ot noitcurtsni edivorP oN oN oN oN seY seY oN oN seY seY .secruoser yrarbil fo sresu tneicfiorp .srehcaet rof gniniart ecivres-ni edivorP tnempoleveD mulucirruC gninrecnoc srotartsinimda dna srehcaet ot noitamrofni edivorP ni dia lliw taht slairetam lanoitcurtsni fo ytilibaliava dna secruos oN oN oN oN seY seY oN oN seY seY .mulucirruc loohcs fo tnempoleved eht dna noitcurtsni fo stinu poleved ot srehcaet moorssalc htiw maeT .smargorp lanoitcurtsni eht ni secruoser yrarbil gnisu seitivitca noitceleS slairetaM ,noitaulave eht ni stneduts dna srehcaet ot ecnatsissa edivorP *seY *seY *seY *seY seY seY *seY *seY seY seY .slairetam lanoitcurtsni fo sesu dna ,noitcudorp ,noitceles secruoseR noitamrofnI dna slairetaM ot sseccA eht troppus taht secruoser dna slairetam fo noitcelloc a edivorP .sdeen resu rof etairporppa era dna mulucirruc seY seY seY seY seY seY seY seY seY seY mumixam rof secivres dna ,serudecorp ,metsys lanoitcnuf a nalP .secruoser fo noitazilitu tnempoleveD lanoisseforP srebmem ffats loohcs rehto dna ,srotartsinimda ,srehcaet tsissA †seY †seY oN oN oN oN oN oN oN oN etairporppa gninrecnoc tnerruc dna elbaegdelwonk gnimoceb ni .tnempiuqe dna ,slairetam ,secivres aidem yrarbil fo sesu 3 3 2 2 4 4 2 2 4 4 dedivorp sepyt ecivres yrarbil fo rebmuN †0 †0 0 0 ‡52.0 1 0 0 1 1 dengissa snairarbil rehcaet emit-lluf fo rebmuN sweivretni dna ;evoba defiitnedi sloohcs fo srotartsinimda etis loohcs dna ffats yrarbil yb dedivorp noitatnemucod fo sisylana s’rotiduA etatS ainrofilaC ;04061 noitceS ,5 eltiT ,snoitalugeR fo edoC ainrofilaC :secruoS .sloohcs esoht morf ffats yek htiw .edivorp ot snairarbil rehcaet sezirohtua ylno gnilaitnederC rehcaeT no noissimmoC eht ecivres a ,yrarbil loohcs eht rof slairetam tceles ot ffats yrarbil ro slapicnirp esu sloohcs esehT * .seitnuoc sgniK dna eraluT ni sloohcs 001 naht erom sevres nairarbil rehcaet elos esohw noitacude fo ecffio ytnuoc sti htiw secivres yrarbil rof stcartnoc tcirtsid loohcs ehT † .sloohcs elddim ruof gnoma yllauqe emit reh stilps ohw nairarbil rehcaet emit-lluf eno syolpme tcirtsid loohcs ehT ‡ 18 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 Redlands Unified School District (Redlands Unified) in San Bernardino County employs a teacher librarian who works at its four middle schools, so she is able to spend the equivalent of one day in any given week at each school. However, the services she provides are still limited. According to the two teacher librarians at Redlands Unified whom we interviewed, the district previously employed a teacher librarian at each of its middle schools, but budget cuts in 2009 eliminated three of the teacher librarian positions and modified the remaining position to serve all four schools. Redlands Unified’s current model allows it to leverage its limited resources at its middle schools to at times provide a broader range of library services at each. Specifically, Redlands Unified employs classified staff at each of its middle school libraries, allowing the teacher librarian to provide additional library services to all four of her assigned schools. In contrast, Redlands Unified does not employ teacher librarians at any of its elementary school libraries, and those libraries consequently provide fewer types of library services than do those of the middle schools and high schools. One of the district’s teacher librarians stated that she is concerned that students will not see a connection between the library and the materials that support their curriculum because of the lack of credentialed teacher librarians at the elementary level. She asserted that introducing students to the purpose of a library at an early age greatly affects use of the library in high school. Teacher librarians at San Juan Unified’s and Redlands Unified’s high schools also provide more types of library services than the districts’ students and teachers receive in lower grades. In general, we noted that schools with teacher librarians provided the most types of library services to their students, as shown in Table 3 on page 17. Specifically, in these two districts, the teacher librarians at the high schools collaborate with the high school teachers in developing curriculum and instructing students on topics such as research skills and information literacy. For example, a teacher librarian in San Juan Unified collaborated with an English teacher to develop lessons on writing research papers, including identifying and documenting sources. In another instance, a teacher librarian in Redlands Unified developed procedures for students to assess the currency, relevance, authority, accuracy, and purpose of online information sources that they used in their coursework. These procedures address multiple goals outlined in the model standards relating to the evaluation of information. None of the teacher librarians could demonstrate that However, although they provide curriculum development they provided professional and instruction services, none of the teacher librarians could development to their schools’ demonstrate that they provided professional development to their teachers, administrators, or staff. schools’ teachers, administrators, or staff. One of the teacher California State Auditor Report 2016-112 19 November 2016 librarians in San Juan Unified stated that her school site and district administration have not shown an interest in the professional development that a teacher librarian can provide. Without the support of school and district administrators, teacher librarians may be unable to provide the full extent of library services that they are authorized and trained to perform. Unlike the districts we visited that employ teacher librarians directly, Woodlake Unified School District (Woodlake Unified) contracts with the Tulare County Office of Education (Tulare County Education) for library services, an approach that limits the services its students and teachers receive. Under its contract, Tulare County Education provides the school district with access to online materials, access to books on a rotating basis, consultant services related to the development of library programs, and one day of technology consultation per year. Although Tulare County Education provided Woodlake Unified’s schools with more types of services than schools without teacher librarians received in the other two districts we visited, Tulare County Education employs only one teacher librarian to serve over 39,000 students throughout Tulare and Kings counties. As a result of the large number of schools she serves, the teacher librarian must limit her visits to schools that directly request her assistance. She supervises six classified staff who work directly with over 100 schools on her behalf, acting as liaisons with the schools and telling school staff about the resources Tulare County Education has available. Although the Commission on Teacher Credentialing (Teacher Schools that obtain services by Credentialing) issued guidance that this practice is one way to contracting with a county office comply with state law, schools that obtain services in this manner of education are unlikely to are unlikely to provide as many library services to their students provide as many library services and teachers as schools that employ their own teacher librarians. to their students and teachers as According to Woodlake Unified’s school and district administrators, schools that employ their own they do not see a need to employ a dedicated teacher librarian teacher librarians. because they are satisfied with the services they receive from Tulare County Education, and they believe classroom teachers provide sufficient lessons on information literacy and research. However, by employing teacher librarians at a school—who are specifically trained in these subjects—a district can better ensure the consistency and quality of the lessons in meeting the state standards. We identified no legal requirement that county offices of education support districts in the provision of library services, and the county offices of education we visited tend to provide limited support to their districts unless the districts contract with them to provide library services. Although San Bernardino County’s Office of the Superintendent of Schools (San Bernardino County Education) offers contracted library services to school districts 20 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 that request them, an assistant superintendent stated that it has received no interest for such services from the school districts within its jurisdiction since dissolving its itinerant library service and replacing it with consulting services. San Bernardino County Education previously employed a roving teacher librarian who provided library services to outlying rural districts but discontinued the program because of difficulties coordinating the schedules of the districts and the teacher librarian. Nevertheless, it still provides some level of support to the districts by contracting with a teacher librarian to conduct free training workshops for teacher librarians and classified staff throughout the school year to The Sacramento County Office of facilitate discussion on topics such as increasing book circulation Education does not employ teacher and holding literacy fairs. In contrast, the Sacramento County librarians, operate a library, or Office of Education (Sacramento County Education) does not otherwise provide districts with employ teacher librarians, operate a library, or otherwise provide any library services. districts with any library services. According to Sacramento County Education’s general counsel, it does not provide library services because it is not legally required to do so and it does not receive funding for this purpose. State and County Agencies Perform Limited Oversight of School Library Services State and county agencies have little authority to monitor the provision of library services when performing their oversight responsibilities. Specifically, although Teacher Credentialing and the county offices of education we visited do monitor staffing assignments to verify that school districts employ or have access to certificated teacher librarians, they do not have express authority to assess whether districts actually provide those services. In addition, county offices of education and Education can do little to ensure that school districts address the model standards when developing their local funding plans. Teacher Credentialing works with county offices of education to verify that school districts are capable of providing library services, but it is not authorized to ensure that districts are actually providing those services. Because certain library services may only be provided by a credentialed teacher librarian, Teacher Credentialing advises school districts to enter into contracts for library services with another public agency if they do not directly employ at least one teacher librarian. However, Teacher Credentialing has no other authority to ensure that the schools in these districts actually receive library services. We noted that the Mariposa County Office of Education entered into a contract for library services to ensure that its only school district could comply with state law, but it also indicated to its board of education that it did not anticipate using the services. Although Teacher Credentialing received evidence that California State Auditor Report 2016-112 21 November 2016 this county’s office of education did not intend to use the contract, the director of Teacher Credentialing’s professional services division stated that actually using the contract is a local decision outside the scope of its assignment monitoring authority. Similarly, the county offices of education we visited that have school districts that contract with other public agencies for library services do not verify whether those districts are actually using those contracts to receive such services. As a result, the State and counties are not ensuring that school districts that do not directly employ teacher librarians still provide a minimum level of library service to students and teachers. In addition, no oversight mechanism exists at the State and No oversight mechanism exists at county level to ensure that schools do not assign classified staff the State and county level to ensure to perform the authorized duties of a teacher librarian. The that schools do not assign classified three counties we visited collectively reported only nine and staff to perform the authorized 11 teacher librarian misassignments in fiscal years 2014–15 duties of a teacher librarian. and 2015–16, respectively, despite our observation that a number of the schools we visited employed classified staff who performed duties reserved for teacher librarians. For example, Sacramento County Education did not report misassignments for San Juan Unified even though the elementary school and middle school we visited had principals or classified staff selecting materials for their libraries, an activity that requires a certificated teacher librarian. Sacramento County Education’s general counsel explained that, at the request of Teacher Credentialing, Sacramento County Education asks districts to provide it with evidence that they employ at least one teacher librarian. If districts do not employ any teacher librarians, Sacramento County Education asks them to explain how they provide library services. However, it does not verify those explanations because it believes it is the responsibility of the school districts to evaluate the provision of library services at the school level. Moreover, even though classified personnel may be improperly performing the activities reserved for certificated staff, Teacher Credentialing’s professional services director stated that it does not have the authority to monitor classified personnel. Because Teacher Credentialing and the counties lack the authority to ensure that only certificated staff provide certain library services, students and teachers may receive these services from individuals who are not qualified to provide them. However, we noted that Teacher Credentialing could identify likely misassignments statewide by comparing its credentialing data against the staffing information that schools report to Education annually. When we compared data between Teacher Credentialing’s Credentialing Automation System Enterprise and Education’s California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS), we identified 111 individuals whom districts reported as employed teacher librarians at some point during fiscal 22 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 years 2010–11 through 2014–15 and who did not appear to possess the requisite credential or permit to provide library services. All of these individuals held valid teaching credentials but not the type of credential or permit that would authorize them to be employed as teacher librarians. About 11 percent of these individuals had held at one time the requisite credentials or permits but had allowed them to expire before the time of their reported employment. Another 11 percent of these individuals did not have the requisite credential or permit for a portion of the time the districts reported them as working as teacher librarians, but they later obtained valid credentials or permits. According to Teacher Credentialing’s professional services division director, Teacher Credentialing has received staffing information from Education since fiscal year 2010–11. However, she stated that Teacher Credentialing does Teacher Credentialing does not use this information to identify not use staffing information it potential misassignments because it is not clear that it has the receives from Education to identify authority or staffing to collect, analyze, or display the employment potential misassignments because data for assignment monitoring. However, state law gives Teacher it believes it is not clear that it has Credentialing broad authority to ensure competence in the teaching the authority or staffing to collect, profession and to establish sanctions for the misuse of credentials analyze, or display the employment and misassignment of credential holders. We, therefore, believe data for assignment monitoring. that Teacher Credentialing should continue to obtain this staffing information from Education and begin using it to identify and follow up on potential misassignments using its existing authority. In addition, state law does not require the county offices of education to ensure that their school districts consider the model standards when developing their local funding plans. State law requires school districts to use the State Education Board’s adopted template to address the implementation of its academic content and performance standards within their local control accountability plans (LCAPs) by including a description of the school district’s annual goals for students’ achievement. County offices of education are then responsible for reviewing and approving the LCAPs of school districts within their jurisdiction. However, they are only allowed to ensure that districts’ LCAPs adhere to the template and that their budgets are sufficient and adhere to expenditure requirements. Although Education identifies the model standards as one of the State’s academic content and performance standards, the template does not list any of the standards that school districts must address. Consequently, the county offices of education do not generally consider the model standards during their review. For example, Sacramento County Education’s general counsel explained that it reviews LCAPs according to the legal requirements of the statutes and regulations, which do not explicitly include determining if the LCAPs address the model standards. Similarly, San Bernardino California State Auditor Report 2016-112 23 November 2016 County Education’s assistant superintendent of Education Support Services explained that San Bernardino County Education lacks the authority to request the information it would need to assess whether districts address the model standards during their LCAP process. Nevertheless, we believe county offices of education could provide guidance to school districts to consider the model standards when creating their LCAPs. For example, Tulare County Education’s library media supervisor explained during a forum with school district superintendents that the model standards describe strong school library programs and encouraged them to use LCAP funds to support teacher librarian positions in their districts. Without additional guidance, school districts may not consider using the model standards during the LCAP process to identify weaknesses in their library programs and to develop goals to address those needs. In fact, two of the school districts we visited had not fully assessed Two of the schools districts we their needs related to the model standards, while the third district visited had not fully assessed was not even aware that the model standards exist. Woodlake their needs related to the model Unified’s and Redlands Unified’s assistant superintendents asserted standards adopted by the State that their districts’ LCAPs address the model standards because Board of Education that specify the the districts are implementing other state standards that overlap level and type of library services with the model standards. Woodlake Unified’s LCAP identified districts must provide, while the goals specific to the State’s common core standards, and it third district was not even aware allocated funds for library services such as purchasing resources that the model standards exist. and extending library hours. Similarly, Redlands Unified provided us with an analysis showing that several of the model standards’ goals align with those of the State’s common core standards. However, the model standards define far more goals related to library services than the common core standards. In fact, according to Education’s analysis, the common core standards’ goals overlap with fewer than half of the model standards’ 64 goals for students in grades nine through 12. For example, unlike the model standards, the common core standards do not include goals related to demonstrating good citizenship online; understanding how to access and retrieve resources from local, regional, state, and national libraries; or using strategies to identify what should be read in depth. In addition, the model standards provide other specific guidance related to library services that is not included in the common core standards, such as goals related to library staffing and resources. Finally, the associate superintendent for schools and student support of the third district, San Juan Unified, explained that district management was not familiar with the model standards or with the requirement to address them in the LCAP. Although school districts are not required to implement the model standards, state law requires school districts to use the LCAP template, which instructs districts to describe goals and identify the related 24 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 state or local priorities they address. The director of Education’s local agency systems support office (systems support director) explained that if a district identifies a need regarding the degree to which it is implementing a specific standard, then it should develop a goal for implementing that particular standard. However, Parents and other stakeholders if school districts do not use the model standards’ guidance to may be unaware of the types of identify weaknesses in their library programs, they may be unable library services that exist and the to identify their needs appropriately. As a result, parents and other guidelines for exemplary provision stakeholders may be unaware of the types of library services that of those services. exist and the guidelines for exemplary provision of those services. The State provides school districts and county offices of education with guidance on developing LCAPs, but this guidance does not appear to have been effective in leading districts to address the model standards. Specifically, the State Education Board adopted a template for districts to use when developing their LCAPs, but the template only specifies that school districts must address state academic content and performance standards and English language development standards. Education’s website that answers frequently asked questions about the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) includes the model standards as one of the 11 content standards it says LCAPs must address. This guidance is not, however, incorporated into the template itself. According to the systems support director, Education does not review LCAPs to ensure that school districts address the 11 standards because the template instructs districts to develop goals to be achieved for each state and any local priorities. However, these goals are specific to the needs the districts identify, which do not necessarily cover all of the standards. The deputy policy director and assistant legal counsel of the State Education Board (deputy policy director) stated that the State Education Board’s LCFF evaluation rubrics, which it adopted in September 2016, aid in measuring a school district’s performance in all LCFF priority areas and includes state performance standards for each LCFF priority. The deputy policy director noted that the State has allocated funding for the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence to provide workshops to school districts and county offices of education on the evaluation rubrics and the revised LCAP template that the State Education Board will adopt this fall. He believes this could reinforce that school districts and county offices of education should consider all of the State Education Board’s adopted academic content and performance standards under this LCFF priority. Without this additional guidance, some school districts, such as San Juan Unified, may be unaware that the model standards are one of the State’s recommended academic and performance standards or that they provide detailed guidance related to information literacy that is not found in the common core standards. As a result, some California State Auditor Report 2016-112 25 November 2016 districts may fail to adequately identify their needs for library services and not develop related goals within their local funding plans accordingly. Education Collects Incomplete Data Related to School Library Services School districts do not provide Education with the information necessary for it to issue effective guidance and to provide decision makers with accurate data related to library services. School districts are required to report the condition of their school libraries to Education annually, even though state law does not expressly require Education to ensure that school districts provide library services to students and teachers. State law requires the districts’ reports to include statistical and other information that Education identifies as desirable for performing a comparative study of school library conditions in the State. Accordingly, Education provides an annual survey to schools that asks questions related to school library staffing, accessibility, and educational materials. However, Education did not design the questions to assess the extent to which schools actually provide library services or implement the model standards. For example, the survey only gathers limited information on library instruction, curriculum development, and professional development. Because the information it collects is limited, Education cannot Because the information it accurately determine the level of library services that schools provide. collects is limited, Education For example, in San Juan Unified, we noted that one of the schools cannot accurately determine without a teacher librarian that we visited indicated in its survey that the level of library services that it provided more types of library instruction to students than another schools provide. school that employed a teacher librarian. However, we determined that the school without a teacher librarian only provided basic library instruction that was technical in nature—such as instructing teachers on the procedures for borrowing the library’s laptops for student use in their classrooms. In contrast, the teacher librarian at the other school provided evidence that she had instructed students on information literacy and research skills. As this example demonstrates, Education’s school library survey does not distinguish between basic instruction in library procedures and the substantive instruction that a teacher librarian is trained to provide on the topics of information literacy and digital citizenship that are covered in the model standards. Consequently, the survey results do not yield enough information for a meaningful comparative analysis of the level of library services that schools provide their students. Even if Education designed the survey to capture this information, the survey responses might not accurately reflect conditions statewide because fewer than 50 percent of schools have completed the annual survey each year since fiscal year 2008–09—the year in which the State ceased providing funding specific to libraries. 26 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 In addition, we noted that school sites without teacher librarians were less likely to complete the survey, potentially skewing the results to show a higher level of library services than actually exists. Of the three school districts we visited, San Juan Unified had the highest participation rate in the most recent survey, with 85.5 percent of the district’s schools responding to Fiscal Year 2014–15 School Library Survey the survey, as shown in the text box. Most of the Response Rates for the Counties We Visited schools within the other two school districts did not respond to the survey. Several of the related school Sacramento County: 42.3 percent and district administrators we visited said they were - San Juan Unified School District: 85.5 percent unaware that the survey was mandatory or that it even existed. San Bernardino County: 60.4 percent - Redlands Unified School District: 30.8 percent We also found that Education’s information for library contacts at both the school and district levels, Tulare County: 23.2 percent such as principals, teacher librarians, or district - Woodlake Unified School District: 16.7 percent administrators, was incomplete. Education’s school Source: California Department of Education’s annual library technology consultant stated that she faces survey responses. challenges in determining which county offices of education have library programs, identifying which districts have a teacher librarian overseeing programs at the district level, and identifying which schools have a library. In addition, she explained that Education does not have the authority to sanction schools that do not complete the survey, so it lacks the ability to increase survey participation. However, Education maintains an online directory of administrators at the school and district level, which she could use to notify them of the reporting requirement. Most of the schools we visited that did not respond to the survey asserted that they would have participated had they known of the requirement. As a result, Education might significantly improve participation by revamping its survey process and related communications. Education’s ability to assess the condition of library services statewide is further limited by problems with the statewide data it collects to satisfy federal requirements. Every year, school districts report student enrollment and staffing information to Education, including the number of teacher librarians they employ. However, because of recent changes to its data collection process, Education cannot use the data it collected in fiscal year 2015–16 to accurately identify the number of teacher librarians employed statewide. According to Education’s deputy superintendent of the District, School, and Innovation Branch (branch deputy), in fiscal year 2015–16 Education changed its way of collecting data at the request of teacher librarians who wanted to be categorized as teachers who teach specific courses rather than as staff providing pupil services. To instruct districts about the changes in the way they should report teacher librarians, Education updated its data guide and provided multiple CALPADS trainings. However, according to Education’s school library technology consultant, the number of reported teacher librarians dropped by 75 percent. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 27 November 2016 The branch deputy explained that it is clear many school districts did not understand that they needed to change how they submitted the data on teacher librarians. He stated that Education could determine the sources of the biggest discrepancies and decide if contacting the related districts would be beneficial, since the districts are able to modify the information they submitted at any time. Unless Education follows up with districts that reported a significant decrease in the number of teacher librarians, the fiscal year 2015–16 data will likely remain an inaccurate source for the number of teacher librarians. The branch deputy explained that Education plans to address the problem in fiscal year 2016–17 by emphasizing the change in the reporting process in a CALPADS information meeting this fall and by providing training, including a special training in conjunction with the California School Libraries Association in January 2017. Education will need to monitor the success of these efforts to ensure the effectiveness of its data collection; otherwise, it will not be able to provide accurate information on the number of teacher librarians California schools employ. The Number of Teacher Librarians Employed Statewide Is Much Lower Than the State’s Adopted Standards Would Recommend School districts throughout the State do not employ enough teacher librarians on average to meet the staffing levels recommended in the model standards. The model standards recommend staffing based on student enrollment; however, as previously discussed, the school districts we visited employ teacher librarians to serve only certain grade levels, or they contract with a public agency that provides library services to a large number of schools. Further, the number of individuals with active credentials authorizing them to provide library services has declined since fiscal year 2008–09, possibly because teacher librarians do not always earn additional pay and appear to be more susceptible to budget cuts. Thus, even schools that are interested in hiring teacher librarians may face difficulties in filling vacancies. Unless the State makes changes to increase the number of teacher librarians, its employment of teacher librarians will likely continue to trail the rest of the nation. Not Enough Individuals Currently Hold or Are Applying for Teacher Librarian Credentials to Meet the Model Standards’ Goals In part because California teachers lack strong incentives to pursue a teacher librarian credential, the State does not have enough certificated teacher librarians with active credentials or emergency permits to achieve the model standards’ recommendation. According to the model standards’ recommendation, the State’s school districts should employ about 7,900 teacher librarians to serve the 6.2 million 28 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 students enrolled in schools statewide. The model standards recommend having one full-time teacher librarian for every 785 students; however, in fiscal year 2014–15, California school districts reported a total of 841 teacher librarians statewide, which equates to only one teacher librarian for every 7,414 students. As shown in Table 4, none of the counties or school districts we visited met the staffing level the model standards recommend. Table 4 Student-to-Teacher Librarian Ratios for Selected Counties and School Districts Fiscal Year 2014–15 County Sacramento San Bernardino Tulare Number of districts 13 33 46 Number of schools 372 552 194 Number of teacher librarians 29 43 3 Number of students 241,017 410,687 102,206 Student-to-Teacher Librarian Ratio 8,311–to–1 9,551–to–1 34,069–to–1 District San Juan Unified Redlands Unified Woodlake Unified Number of schools 74 27 6 Number of district-employed teacher librarians 9 4 0 Number of students 49,114 21,326 2,291 Student-to-Teacher Librarian Ratio 5,457–to–1 5,332–to–1 0* High Schools Number of schools 16 6 3 Number of district-employed teacher librarians 9 3 0 Number of students 15,975 7,329 723 Student-to-Teacher Librarian Ratio 1,775–to–1 2,443–to–1 0* Middle Schools Number of schools 15 5 1 Number of district-employed teacher librarians 0 1 0 Number of students 10,787 4,774 492 Student-to-Teacher Librarian Ratio 0 4,774–to–1 0* Elementary Schools Number of schools 43 16 2 Number of district-employed teacher librarians 0 0 0 Number of students 22,352 9,223 1,076 Student-to-Teacher Librarian Ratio 0 0 0* Sources: California State Auditor’s analysis of documents from the districts and counties indicated above, and data obtained from the California Department of Education’s California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System and California Basic Educational Data System. * The school district contracts for library services with its county office of education whose sole teacher librarian serves schools in Tulare and Kings counties with over 39,000 students in total. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 29 November 2016 Moreover, according to Teacher Credentialing’s data, fewer than 2,100 individuals in the State had active credentials authorizing them to provide library services in fiscal year 2015–16. Consequently, even if every one of these teachers were employed to provide services, California would still fall far short of the model standards’ recommendations. Teacher Credentialing’s data further indicate that the number of individuals with active credentials decreased 22 percent between fiscal years 2008–09 and 2015–16, from nearly 2,700 to nearly 2,100, as shown in Figure 2 on the following page. Although most of the decrease is attributable to the declining number of individuals with legacy credentials, which Teacher Credentialing generally stopped issuing after 1994, the number of individuals with teacher librarian credentials or emergency permits also decreased by The number of teachers pursuing 8 percent over this period, from 1,914 in fiscal year 2008–09 to 1,761 teacher librarian credentials or in fiscal year 2015–16. Thus, the number of teachers pursuing teacher emergency permits appears to librarian credentials appears to have decreased as well. have decreased. According to the program director of Teacher Librarian Services at Fresno Pacific University (Fresno program director), earning a teacher librarian credential does not usually lead to a significant pay increase and can even lead to lower compensation if taking a librarian position involves the teacher switching districts and losing a longevity bonus. At the same time, the credentialing process requires a substantial investment of time, money, and effort. Specifically, the four credential programs for teacher librarians in California require at least 27 units of coursework and cost between $9,000 and $20,000, in addition to the cost of becoming qualified to be a teacher. Because California teachers lack strong incentives to pursue a teacher librarian credential, the number of certificated teacher librarians may continue to shrink. Of the three school districts we visited, only San Juan Unified paid its teacher librarians extra for the additional credential—an annual stipend of $2,139. The other two school districts we visited only provided additional pay if a teacher librarian took enough semester units to qualify for a different pay scale—a practice that is not exclusive to teacher librarians. According to the teacher librarian program coordinator at San José State University (San José program coordinator), some teachers may also choose not to pursue the credential because they are aware that teacher librarian positions are usually among the first cut by school districts when funding drops. We noted one example at Redlands Unified where a current teacher librarian had previously lost her job as a middle school teacher librarian in 2009 because of budget issues. She briefly worked at the district as a high school teacher before eventually returning as a teacher librarian in 2016. Given that only 841 of the 2,168 individuals with credentials authorized to provide library services were actually employed as teacher librarians in fiscal year 2014–15, other teacher librarians may have had similar experiences. 30 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 Figure 2 Number of Individuals Authorized to Provide Library Services, by Type Fiscal Years 2008–09 Through 2015–16 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 raeY lacsiF 2,683 2008–09 1,669 245 769 2,592 2009–10 1,709 198 685 2,510 2010–11 1,746 154 610 2,440 2011–12 1,765 115 560 2,329 2012–13 1,723 103 503 2,237 2013–14 1,654 132 451 2,168 2014–15 1,647 132 389 2,089 2015–16 1,616 145 328 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 Teacher Librarian Emergency Permit Legacy Source: California State Auditor’s analysis of data obtained from the Commission on Teacher Credentialing’s Credentialing Automation System Enterprise. Note: An individual may have multiple credentials in a given fiscal year. To ensure we did not count individuals more than once in a given fiscal year, we assigned each individual to a category using the following order: Teacher Librarian, Emergency Permit, or Legacy credential type. For example, if an individual had both teacher librarian and emergency permit credentials, we counted the individual only in the teacher librarian credential type. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 31 November 2016 In fact, some school districts and counties have experienced difficulty attracting qualified teacher librarian candidates. For example, San Bernardino County Education posted the same teacher librarian position for a year before hiring a viable candidate. Similarly, Redlands Unified and San Juan Unified reported that they received only one or two credentialed applicants for recent teacher librarian openings. The Fresno program director and San José program coordinator also said that they have received numerous calls from school districts across the State looking for teacher librarians, but they have been unable to identify available candidates because the majority of teachers enrolled in their credentialing programs are already employed as teacher librarians on an emergency basis—a method for schools to temporarily fill Because most teachers with teacher librarian positions with teachers who are generally pursuing emergency credentials already their teacher librarian credentials. Because most teachers with have jobs as teacher librarians, only emergency credentials already have jobs as teacher librarians, only a few of the graduating teacher a few of the graduating teacher librarians are available to fill new librarians are available to fill new job offerings. As a result, districts and counties may be unable to job offerings. employ teacher librarians even if they wish to do so. National Student-to-Teacher Librarian Ratios Have Increased, but California Continues to Lag Far Behind Since the State Education Board adopted the model standards in 2010, the national average that it used to establish its recommended ratio increased from 785 students per teacher librarian to 1,109 students per teacher librarian in fiscal year 2013–14—the year with the most recent national data available. Regardless of the changes in the national average, California still has by far the poorest ratio of students to teacher librarians in the nation. National data from fiscal year 2013–14 indicate California employed only one teacher librarian for every 8,091 students, while the state with the next poorest ratio, Idaho, employed one teacher librarian for every 5,533 students. Table 5 on the following page shows California’s ranking compared to the next four most populous states. Taken together, the population of these five states accounted for 38 percent of the nation’s public school students in fiscal year 2013–14. School districts in other states appear to place a higher value on the services offered by teacher librarians than do the districts in California. As Table 5 shows, each of the other states we reviewed employed more teacher librarians per student than California. In addition, the largest school districts within two of those states provide greater monetary incentives to their teacher librarians than the largest California school district—Los Angeles Unified. As described previously, the school districts we visited in California do not provide significant monetary incentives to their teacher librarians. 32 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 Table 5 Comparison of Student-to-Teacher Librarian Ratios for the Five Most Populous States Fiscal Year 2013–14 STUDENT-TO-TEACHER STATE NUMBER OF STUDENTS LIBRARIAN RATIO NATIONAL RANKING New York 2.7 million 1,089 to 1 32 Texas 5.2 million 1,119 to 1 34 Florida 2.7 million 1,277 to 1 36 Illinois 2.1 million 1,442 to 1 43 California 6.3 million 8,091 to 1 50 Source: U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics, Fiscal Year 2013–14 data. School districts in California may find it difficult to afford a student-to-teacher librarian ratio similar to that of other states because California spends less than the nationwide average per student, even though the cost of living in California is generally higher than that of most other states. According to the most recent nationwide data, California spent $9,595 per student in fiscal year 2013–14, an amount somewhat below the national average of $11,009 and far below the $20,610 per student New York spent, even though the cost of living in California and New York is comparable. Further, Illinois, which has a cost of living near the national average, managed to spend $13,077 per student, roughly 36 percent more than California. The lack of financial support may, in part, hinder school districts from employing and retaining more teacher librarians. In addition, some states have laws that require school districts to employ teacher librarians based on school size or grade level, which creates a demand for teacher librarians within those states. According to one study, states with the best ratios of students to teacher librarians tend to have state mandates to employ teacher librarians. For example, New York has a state mandate requiring the employment of full-time teacher librarians. Specifically, it requires one full-time teacher librarian per 1,000 students in each secondary school. By establishing a mandate on the staffing of teacher librarians, some states have demonstrated that they value library services as a fundamental part of education. Unless California’s state and local decision makers demonstrate that they place an equally high value on library services, the State’s employment of teacher librarians will likely continue to trail the rest of the nation. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 33 November 2016 Recommendations To ensure that students receive a level of library services that better aligns with the model standards, the Legislature should do the following: • Define the minimum level and types of library services that schools must provide. • Broaden the authority of Teacher Credentialing and the county offices of education to address classified staff who perform duties that require certification. To strengthen their library programs and help the State assess the condition of school libraries statewide, Redlands Unified, San Juan Unified, and Woodlake Unified should do the following: • Ensure that teacher librarians are involved in the selection of library materials at each school. • Consider ways to leverage the teacher librarians they already employ to offer a broader range of services to all grade levels. • Use the model standards to assess the needs of their school library programs and address any identified needs during their LCAP process. • Require their schools to participate in Education’s annual school library survey. To strengthen school library programs in their counties and help school districts comply with state law, the Sacramento, San Bernardino, and Tulare county offices of education should provide guidance to their school districts on using teacher librarians for the provision of library services, completing Education’s annual school library survey, and identifying the needs of their school library programs by using the model standards as part of their LCAP process. To strengthen its monitoring of staff assignments, Teacher Credentialing should work with Education to identify potential misassignments by comparing annually the staffing information reported by school districts to Education against Teacher Credentialing’s credentialing records. Further, Teacher Credentialing should incorporate misassignments identified using Education’s data into its existing notification, reporting, and sanctioning structure. If Teacher Credentialing believes it needs express statutory authority to do so, it should seek it. 34 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 To better understand the condition of school libraries statewide and to raise stakeholders’ awareness of the State Education Board’s adopted model standards, Education should do the following: • Redesign its annual school library survey to solicit answers that will better help Education determine whether schools are implementing the model standards and better assess the type and extent of library services the schools provide. • Use its directory of school districts to notify administrators about the annual school library survey and remind them that participation is mandatory. • Work with the State Education Board to incorporate consideration of all academic content and performance standards adopted by the State Education Board into the tools that guide the LCFF process, including but not limited to the LCAP template, the evaluation rubrics, and publicly funded LCFF/LCAP trainings, such as those offered by the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence. • Work with Teacher Credentialing to assist it in identifying potential misassignments by providing staffing information reported by school districts to Teacher Credentialing by April of each academic year. • Identify school districts that reported employing significantly fewer teacher librarians in fiscal year 2015–16 than in previous years and verify the accuracy of their fiscal year 2015–16 reports. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 35 November 2016 We conducted this audit under the authority vested in the California State Auditor by Section 8543 et seq. of the California Government Code and according to generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives specified in the Scope and Methodology section of the report. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. Respectfully submitted, ELAINE M. HOWLE, CPA State Auditor Date: November 17, 2016 Staff: Jim Sandberg-Larsen, CPA, CPFO, Audit Principal Andrew Lee Aren Knighton Jeffrey Filice IT Audits: Michelle J. Baur, CISA, Audit Principal Lindsay M. Harris, MBA, CISA Kim L. Buchanan, MBA, CIA Legal Counsel: Stephanie Ramirez-Ridgeway, Sr. Staff Counsel For questions regarding the contents of this report, please contact Margarita Fernández, Chief of Public Affairs, at 916.445.0255. 36 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 Blank page inserted for reproduction purposes only. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 37 November 2016 * 1 2 3 * California State Auditor’s comments begin on page 43. 38 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 39 November 2016 40 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 4 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 41 November 2016 5 42 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 Blank page inserted for reproduction purposes only. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 43 November 2016 Comments CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR’S COMMENTS ON THE RESPONSE FROM THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION To provide clarity and perspective, we are commenting on the California Department of Education’s (Education) response to our audit. The numbers below correspond to the numbers we have placed in the margin of Education’s response. As we state on page 13, audit objective 4 was to determine whether 1 the number of credentialed teacher librarians is insufficient based on available indicators and to determine what factors contribute to the shortage. For example, we present student-to-teacher librarian ratios and student enrollment information by location on page 28. In fact, we engaged in several conversations with Education representatives explaining the need for the requested data and pointed out this specific audit objective to them. Audit standards require that we obtain sufficient and appropriate 2 evidence to support our audit findings, conclusions, and recommendations. As such, we required Education’s assistance during the course of the audit. Education states that we did not report its reasons for making 3 changes to its data collection process; however, we included the explanation of Education’s deputy superintendent of the District, School, and Innovation Branch (branch deputy) on page 26. The branch deputy stated that Education changed its way of collecting data at the request of teacher librarians who wanted to be categorized as teachers who teach specific courses, rather than as staff providing pupil services. Given the large decrease in the number of teacher librarians that school districts reported in fiscal year 2015–16, Education’s changes did not improve the data quality for librarians. Education is incorrect in its assertion. As described on page 22, we 4 indicate that Education has provided staffing information to the Commission on Teacher Credentialing (Teacher Credentialing) since fiscal year 2010–11. Further, we consulted with Education to determine that April was a reasonable time frame for Education to provide Teacher Credentialing the staffing information each year. We disagree with Education’s assertion that it is not feasible or 5 realistic to provide staffing information to Teacher Credentialing by April of each year, as we determined this time frame based on Education’s input and estimation that it could complete this task 44 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 between March and May. To the extent that Education now believes that April is no longer feasible, we look forward to its identification of an annual time frame it can meet in its 60-day response to our audit. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 45 November 2016 Commission on Teacher Credentialing 1900 Capitol Avenue Sacramento, CA 95811 (916) 322-6253 Fax (916) 445-0800 www.ctc.ca.gov Office of the Executive Director October 27, 2016 Elaine M. Howle * State Auditor Bureau of State Audits 555 Capitol Mall, Suite 300 Sacramento, California 95814 Dear Ms. Howle: Commission staff have reviewed the findings of the state auditor report titled, School Library Services: Vague State Laws and a Lack of Monitoring Allow School Districts to Provide a Minimal Level of Library Services. We greatly appreciate the department’s support and thoughtful dialogue in working with the Commission in putting the final draft report together. Introduction The Commission’s core mission is to ensure integrity, relevance, and high quality in the preparation, certification, and discipline of the educators who serve all of California’s diverse students. The Commission recognizes and promotes excellence in the preparation and practice of California’s education workforce. The agency also values equity, quality, inclusiveness and diversity in standards, programs, practices, people and the workplace and is dedicated and committed to the education and welfare of California’s diverse students. We appreciate that the findings in this report help to support and respect the mission of the Commission and work to help ensure that qualified teachers are in place throughout our school districts and libraries. Response to Audit Findings Below you will find the Commission’s comments and clarifications to the findings provided in the final draft report. Level of Service The following statements can be found on pages 4 and 24 of the draft report: 1 “Although the State’s Commission on Teacher Credentialing (Teacher Credentialing) has issued guidance that this practice is one way to comply with state law, schools that obtain services in this way are unlikely to provide as many library services to their students and teachers as schools that employ their own teacher librarian.” (Page 4) “Although the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (Teacher Credentialing) issued guidance that this practice is one way to comply with state law, schools that obtain services in this manner are unlikely to provide as many library services to their students and teachers as schools that employ their own teacher librarians.” (Page 24) Ensuring Educator Excellence * California State Auditor’s comments appear on page 49. 46 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 Commission’s Response: The Commission has issued this non-binding guidance in an effort to be helpful, but the responsibility to monitor the level of service is not within the Commission’s authority. The Commission provides information on all legal assignment options for employers and a library contract is one of the legal options. Misassignments The following statements can be found on pages 5 and 28 of the draft report: “However, Teacher Credentialing stated that they did not identify this activity as an inappropriately staffed position, referred to as a misassignment, because they lack the authority to monitor the assignments of classified staff.” (Page 5) 2 “However, state law gives Teacher Credentialing broad authority to ensure competence in the teaching profession and establish sanctions for the misuse of credentials and misassignment of credential holders. We therefore believe that Teacher Credentialing should continue to obtain this staffing information from Education and begin using it to identify and follow up on potential misassignments using its existing authority.” (Page 28) Commission’s Response: Because there was a contract in place and the Commission does not monitor the level of service, the contract satisfies the requirement. The Commission does not have authority to monitor non-certificated individuals. Material Selection The following statement can be found on Table 3 on page 22 of the draft report: The asterisk states that “…schools use principals or library staff to select materials, a service the Commission on Teacher Credentialing only authorizes teacher librarians to provide.” Commission Response: The regulations specify that teacher librarians select materials for school or district libraries. The ‘select materials’ in the footnote to the table could be misunderstood to be any materials and the regulation is specific to materials for the school or district library. This footnote would be more accurate if it stated: …schools use principals or library staff to select materials for the district or school library, a service that the Commission on Teacher Credentialing only authorizes teacher librarians to provide. Response to Recommendation Below is the Commission’s response to the report recommendation as it relates to the agency. To strengthen its monitoring of staff assignments, Teacher Credentialing should work with Education to identify potential misassignments by comparing annually the staffing information reported by school districts to Education against Teacher Credentialing’s credential records. Further, Teacher Credentialing should incorporate the identified misassignments into its existing notification, reporting, and sanctioning structure. Commission Response: Staff agrees that using the CDE data could help sharpen the process of identifying misassignments and could allow assignments to be monitored annually rather than once every four years. Ensuring Educator Excellence California State Auditor Report 2016-112 47 November 2016 Again, we thank and appreciate the Auditor’s willingness to work with us in formulating the final draft of this report. We look forward to the release of the final report and working towards implementing the recommendations put forth in order to continue supporting teachers and students in California. Please contact us with any other questions or comments. Sincerely, Mary Vixie Sandy, Ed.D. Executive Director Ensuring Educator Excellence 48 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 Blank page inserted for reproduction purposes only. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 49 November 2016 Comments CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR’S COMMENTS ON THE RESPONSE FROM THE COMMISSION ON TEACHER CREDENTIALING To provide clarity and perspective, we are commenting on the Commission on Teacher Credentialing’s (Teacher Credentialing) response to our audit. The numbers below correspond to the numbers we have placed in the margin of Teacher Credentialing’s response. While preparing our draft report for publication, some page 1 numbers shifted. Therefore, the page numbers Teacher Credentialing cites in its response do not correspond to the page numbers in our final report. Teacher Credentialing incorrectly cites the statement from page 22, 2 which relates to certificated staff, in discussing the monitoring of classified staff. As we state on page 22, we believe that Teacher Credentialing has the authority to use California Department of Education’s data on employed teachers to identify the misassignment of certificated individuals. 50 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 Blank page inserted for reproduction purposes only. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 51 November 2016 * * California State Auditor’s comment appears on page 53. 52 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 1 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 53 November 2016 Comment CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR’S COMMENT ON THE RESPONSE FROM THE REDLANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT To provide clarity and perspective, we are commenting on the Redlands Unified School District’s (Redlands Unified) response to our audit. The number below corresponds to the number we have placed in the margin of Redlands Unified’s response. We stand by our recommendation on page 33 that Redlands Unified 1 should use the Model School Library Standards for California Public Schools, Kindergarten Through Grade Twelve (model standards) to assess the needs of their school library programs and address any identified needs during the local control accountability plan process. Redlands Unified states that its analysis shows the model standards are covered in 85 percent of the grade 12 Scope and Sequence; however, its analysis is limited to the 13 overarching standards that continue across all grade levels. As we state on pages 9 and 10, the model standards consist of smaller, more specific objectives that students should achieve by the end of a specified grade level or grade span, such as the span of grades nine through twelve in high school. As we note on page 23, the common core standards’ goals overlap with fewer than half of the model standards’ 64 goals for students in grades nine through 12. In addition, the model standards provide other specific guidance related to library services that is not included in the common core standards, such as goals related to library staffing and resources, which Redlands Unified did not address in its analysis. 54 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 Blank page inserted for reproduction purposes only. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 55 November 2016 Sacramento County MAILING: P.O. Box 269003, Sacramento, CA 95826-9003 PHYSICAL LOCATION: 10474 Mather Boulevard, Mather, CA Office of Education (916) 228-2500 • www.scoe.net David W. Gordon October 27, 2016 Superintendent Via Electronic Mail to AndrewL@auditor.ca.gov BOARD OF EDUCATION Jacquelyn Levy Elaine M. Howle, CPA * President California State Auditor 621 Capitol Mall, Suite 1200 Greg Geeting Vice President Sacramento, CA 95814 Joanne Ahola Re: School Library Services Audit O. Alfred Brown, Sr. Heather Davis Dear Ms. Howle: Harold Fong, M.S.W. The Sacramento County Office of Education (SCOE) has received your Brian M. Rivas draft school library services audit report. We appreciate your staff’s work on this audit and your invitation to respond to the audit recommendation involving SCOE. Our response is below. Recommendation “To strengthen library programs in their counties and help school districts comply with the law, the county offices of education in Sacramento County, …should provide guidance to their school districts on using teacher librarians for the provision of library services, completing Education’s annual survey, and identifying the needs of their school library programs by using the model standards as part of their LCAP process.” (Pages 9, 41- 1 42) SCOE Response The draft audit report finds that “the law does not clearly define required library services or establish a means for ensuring their provision” and “state law does not specify the minimum level of library services school districts must provide.” (Page 19) Therefore, we understand that the recommendation above is not intended to suggest that county offices of education are out of compliance with existing law, but rather to suggest practices that you believe would strengthen library programs and assist school districts if implemented. The final unredacted audit report is not yet available. Nevertheless, our 2 initial reflection is that to increase library services, school districts will not need additional guidance. They will need additional resources. This lack of resources is referenced in your draft report and highlighted by your comparison of California’s education expenditures with those in other * California State Auditor’s comments appear on page 57. 56 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 Elaine M. Howle, CPA October 27, 2016 Page 2 states, however, the recommendation seems to suggest that more library services will occur when there is more guidance. Similarly, the title of the report – “School Library Services: Vague Laws and Lack of Monitoring Allow School Districts to Provide a Minimum Level of Library Services” – suggests that more specific state laws and increased monitoring could increase the level of library services. California’s underfunded education system is a zero sum situation – without additional resources, more library services will result only from a corresponding loss in other important programs, such as arts, civics, etc. SCOE is committed to helping Sacramento’s nearly one-quarter million K-12 students receive quality education services. Therefore, once we have had an opportunity to review the final unredacted audit report and the practices upon which it is based, we will consider and determine whether additional guidance to our school districts will assist in strengthening school library programs in the county. Thank you for your time and consideration. If you have questions or need additional information, please let us know. Sincerely, David W. Gordon Sacramento County Superintendent of Schools DWG/TS/mr California State Auditor Report 2016-112 57 November 2016 Comments CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR’S COMMENTS ON THE RESPONSE FROM THE SACRAMENTO COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION To provide clarity and perspective, we are commenting on the Sacramento County Office of Education’s (Sacramento County Education) response to our audit. The numbers below correspond to the numbers we have placed in the margin of Sacramento County Education’s response. While preparing our draft report for publication, some page 1 numbers shifted. Therefore, the page numbers Sacramento County Education cites in its response do not correspond to the page numbers in our final report. Sacramento County Education states that school districts will not 2 need additional guidance to increase library services. As we state on page 24, school districts may be unaware that the Model School Library Standards for California Public Schools, Kindergarten Through Grade Twelve (model standards) are one of the State’s recommended academic content and performance standards. As a result, some districts may fail to identify the needs of their school library programs and allocate resources accordingly. In addition, as we note on page 21, a school district we visited in Sacramento County had principals or classified staff perform certain activities that require a certificated teacher librarian. Thus, we believe that school districts could benefit from receiving additional guidance on using teacher librarians for the provision of library services. Finally, as we note on page 26, less than half of the schools in Sacramento County responded to the California Department of Education’s annual library survey. As a result, school districts could benefit from additional guidance to improve their participation in this mandatory survey. 58 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 Blank page inserted for reproduction purposes only. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 59 November 2016 October 27, 2016 Ms. Elaine M. Howle, CPA * California State Auditor 621 Capitol Mall, Suite 1200 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Ms. Howle: Thank you for your interest in library services for California’s public schools. This letter is a formal response to the draft audit report (“Report”) “School Library Services: Vague State Laws and a Lack of Monitoring Allow School Districts to Provide a Minimal Level of Library Services” presented to the San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools (SBCSS) on October 21, 2016. As the draft Report indicates, the State Board of Education adopted Model School Library Standards for K-12 students in 2010. Additionally, state law requires school districts to provide library services, but does not clearly define library services and does not require school districts to directly employ teacher librarians to provide such services. The Report also clearly acknowledges that there is no legal requirement for county offices of education to support districts in the provision of library services (pg. 24). 1 With that being said, on page 19 of the Report, the words “do little” suggest that there is some oversight 2 responsibility for state and county offices to monitor library services that is being shirked, when in fact, county offices of education have no such authority (except to monitor staff assignments and credentialing of teacher librarians), yet provide an array of supports. Page 26 of the report indicates that the state and counties “are not ensuring” a minimum level of library service is being provided….” The primary character of county offices of education is that of support, however the text does not acknowledge the extent or nature of the support provided. San Bernardino County is actually doing plenty to support the use of libraries at the school, district, city, and county level. The SBCSS provides coordinated outreach and assistance to support school library services in the 33 school districts in San Bernardino County, as well as coordinating and aligning resources with the San Bernardino County librarian to provide access to library services and resources to educators, students and families throughout the county. Because the ability to read by third grade is one of the greatest indicators of a child’s future academic performance and success in life, our countywide Library Collaborative of school and community libraries share multiple programs and resources, and a wealth of professional capacity to promote and increase family literacy and the reading proficiency of students. Just some of the initiatives and key actions taken include: • Establishing a countywide Vision2Read initiative and literacy campaign as part of the Countywide Vision’s Cradle to Career Roadmap and collective impact efforts with school districts, county government, business, community- and faith-based organizations, and students and families; * California State Auditor’s comments begin on page 63. 60 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 October 27, 2016 Page 2 • Supporting the “Reading by Third Grade” milestone of the Cradle to Career Roadmap by promoting a cohesive literacy message to students, families, staff and stakeholder groups countywide; • Forming new collaborative effort between the SBCSS and the County Library System to promote student literacy and provide access to library-rich resources through the county library system’s 32 branches and school libraries at more than 550 public schools in the county’s 33 school districts; • Convening the SBCSS’ Media Library Education Network(MLEN) to support districts across the county in raising the level of effective use of libraries and re-establishing their role in student education from a period when districts struggled to keep their library doors open or staffed; 3 (While MLEN is mentioned on page 25 of the report, this countywide network is inaccurately described as, “…a number of training workshops.”) • Hosting the annual Family Reading Rally, supporting early literacy in homes, communities and schools by holding family/parent literacy workshops and providing free books to students and families who attend the event; • Coordinating a countywide summer reading program with county, city and school libraries resulting in a 28 percent increase in the number of children and adults participating in summer reading programs this year; • Encouraging adoption of September as National Reading Month by municipalities and governance bodies throughout the county; • Expanding opportunities to deliver research-based literacy development to families and students through a multi-platform approach of digital and online resources, webinars and podcasts; • Holding a countywide library conference for school librarians, library technicians, county and city librarians to share best practices and new library resources; • Launching the Footsteps2Brilliance Mobile Technology Platform, an early literacy solution to increase reading proficiency and word bank knowledge of preschool age children in the county. 3 Given this alignment of resources and array of services offered, it is of concern that the report does not include examples of the extensive work that has taken place in San Bernardino County to build a network of library services and resources between school, city and county libraries. 4 With regards to the Model School Library Standards, it may be important to make clear that the Model School Library Standards are guidance, not required or a mandate. It should be noted that the ELA/ELD California State Standards include the same requirements that are in the library standards. In alignment with these standards, county offices of education provide tremendous amounts of professional and technical development for pre-K through 12 teachers, administrators and district leadership in how to guide students to “..learn how to transform isolated bits of information into knowledge, evaluate sources, and think critically” (pg. 3, Summary). Teachers in all content areas are also required to provide exactly this learning both in the way of knowledge, and in applied activities and projects, as part of the Common Core State Standards. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 61 November 2016 October 27, 2016 Page 3 It may be important for the recommendations of the Auditor to emphasize the nature of the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) and Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) guidelines, and of the State Board LCAP template (pg. 9 recommendation to make Library Standards “part of the LCAP Process,” and pg. 28-29, 31). Following the core principle of Governor Jerry Brown’s Local Control Funding Formula, the LCAP template is designed to ensure there is a balance of local control with assurances to see that state priority areas and content standards, and local district goals for student achievement, are being met. For example, page 16 of the Report points out that “under the current model, districts decide how best to spend school funding to meet their identified needs.” Among county offices of education statewide, SBCSS was the first to develop a model that provides a multi-faceted team of experts to support districts in the cross-development of their budgets and LCAPs, and to work collaboratively with districts in continuous improvement to meet both state requirements and local priorities. Finally, the title of the report, “School Library Services: Vague State Laws and a Lack of Monitoring Allow 2 School Districts to Provide a Minimal Level of Library Services” is concerning as it suggests that there is a mandated monitoring requirement that is not occurring and that districts desire to provide a minimal level of library services. Also, the tone of the Report, in its entirety, would lead one to infer that compliance requirements are not being met, yet there are no statutes or regulations to monitor compliance of library services. While each school district and its local governing board ultimately hold responsibility for adopting their own local policies with regards to state and federal statute, and state adopted content standards, my 5 office is committed to serving the districts in San Bernardino County with guidance, support and best practices concerning library services for students. There are many ways to increase library services and usage. The SBCSS has found that aligning resources in a countywide collective impact approach is enhancing the effectiveness of services to students and families. I greatly appreciate your interest in and support of public education in San Bernardino County, our schools, students and staff. I look forward to working collaboratively and positively with the State Auditor on this matter to see that all of our students receive the best access to library services and opportunities to fulfill their greatest potential. Sincerely, Ted Alejandre San Bernardino County Superintendent 62 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 Blank page inserted for reproduction purposes only. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 63 November 2016 Comments CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR’S COMMENTS ON THE RESPONSE FROM THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS To provide clarity and perspective, we are commenting on the San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools’ (San Bernardino County Education) response to our audit. The numbers below correspond to the numbers we have placed in the margin of San Bernardino County Education’s response. While preparing our draft report for publication, some page 1 numbers shifted. Therefore, the page numbers San Bernardino County Education cites in its response do not correspond to the page numbers in our final report. San Bernardino County Education states that the report’s title and 2 tone would lead one to infer that there is a mandated monitoring requirement that is not occurring. However, as we note on pages 19 and 20, we identified no legal requirement that county offices of education support districts in the provision of library services and we determined that county offices of education do not have express authority to assess whether districts actually provide library services. Because county offices of education have no monitoring requirement related to library services and no authority to ensure the provision of those services, we noted that county offices of education do little to ensure a minimum level of library services is provided. As we state on page 21, students and teachers may receive library services from individuals who are not qualified to provide them because counties lack the authority to ensure that only certificated staff provide certain library services. Accordingly, on page 33 we recommend the Legislature broaden the authority of the county offices of education to address classified staff who perform duties that require certification. Further, on page 25 we identified a low school district response rate to Education’s annual school library survey and on pages 22 to 24 we note weaknesses in school districts’ consideration of the Model School Library Standards for California Schools, Kindergarten Through Grade Twelve (model standards) in their local control accountability plan (LCAP) processes. San Bernardino County Education states that page 20 of the report 3 inaccurately describes its Media Library Education Network (MLEN); however, we do not specifically mention the MLEN anywhere in the report. In addition, San Bernardino County Education describes a variety of initiatives and actions it has taken related to literacy; however, these examples are generally outside of the scope of our audit objectives, which are specific to school library services and 64 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 teacher librarians. To address the audit scope and objectives, we describe San Bernardino County Education’s past employment of a roving teacher librarian on page 20. Although San Bernardino County Education discontinued the program, we credit it for contracting with a teacher librarian to conduct free training workshops for teacher librarians and classified staff. 4 San Bernardino County Education states that the English Language Arts/English Language Development California State Standards— part of the California Common Core State Standards—include the same requirements that are in the library standards. However, as we state on page 23, the common core standards’ goals overlap with fewer than half of the model standards’ 64 goals for students in grades nine through 12. In addition, the model standards provide other specific guidance related to library services that is not included in the common core standards, such as goals related to library staffing and resources. In addition, San Bernardino County Education states that it may be important to make clear that the model standards are guidance, not required or a mandate. However, we already note this fact on pages 10, 15, and 23. 5 San Bernardino County Education did not specifically address our recommendation related to strengthening school library programs in its county. However, San Bernardino County Education states that it is committed to serving its districts with guidance, support, and best practices concerning library services for students. Thus, we look forward to San Bernardino County Education’s 60-day response to clarify the specific actions it is taking to provide guidance to its school districts regarding the use of teacher librarians, completion of the annual school library survey, and consideration of the model standards as part of the LCAP process. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 65 November 2016 San Juan Unified School District 3738 Walnut Avenue, Carmichael, California 95608 P.O. Box 477, Carmichael, California 95609-0477 Internet Web Site: www.sanjuan.edu Kent Kern, Superintendent of Schools Donna O’Neil, Ed. D., Associate Superintendent, Schools and Student Support October 27, 2016 Elaine M. Howle, CPA 621 Capitol Mall Sacramento, CA 95814 Re: San Juan Unified School District Library Service Audit Report 2016-112 Dear Ms. Howle; San Juan Unified School District is committed to providing high quality educational services and supports for students and families to ensure that each student is college, career and citizenship ready and graduates on time. We strongly believe in holding every student at our 63 schools to high expectations as outlined in state content and performance standards. We also strongly believe in providing the necessary services and supports to maximize each student’s success. Our Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) and the adopted district budget outline how we support our schools and students in reaching the identified goals. Based upon the findings and recommendations in the School Library Service Audit Report, we will be reviewing San Juan’s library services to identify how to support all of our students in developing information literacy and meeting standards in all other content areas. Staff has now been identified and assigned with specific responsibilities around support of teacher librarians and other library staff. Additionally, Board Policy 6163.1 Libraries/Media Centers, as well as the related Administrative Regulations, will be reviewed and updated during the 2016-17 school year using the California School Board Association’s model board policy as a guide. Once in place this Board Policy will form the basis of improvement work in the area of library services. Based on a review of current practices in relationship to the revised Board Policy and Administrative Regulations we will prioritize needs and allocate resources, as available, to strengthen library services within district schools. Revised processes which support increased services will be implemented. I am confident these changes will increase the library services for staff and students in San Juan Unified School District. Enclosed please find the responses to State Audit Report 2016-112. Sincerely, Donna O’Neil, Ed.D. Associate Superintendent of Schools and Support Services 66 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 San Juan Unified School District 3738 Walnut Avenue, Carmichael, California 95608 P.O. Box 477, Carmichael, California 95609-0477 Internet Web Site: www.sanjuan.edu Kent Kern, Superintendent of Schools Donna O’Neil, Ed. D., Associate Superintendent, Schools and Student Support Recommendation 1 Ensure that teacher librarians are involved in the selection of library materials at each school Response San Juan Unified School District agrees with this recommendation. Identified district staff will facilitate collaboration among library staff across grade spans, drawing on the knowledge and expertise of teacher librarians to provide input in the selection of library materials for schools. Board Policy and Administrative Regulation 6163.1 will be reviewed and updated to increase guidance on the library material selection process. Once the new policy and regulations are in place, an ongoing process will be established and implemented to ensure compliance with the policy. Recommendation 2 Consider ways to leverage the teacher librarians that they already employ to offer a broader range of services to all grade levels Response San Juan Unified School District agrees with the recommendation and will support collaboration among all library staff to capitalize on the expertise and training of teacher librarians. Identified district staff will facilitate collaboration among library staff across grade spans, drawing on the knowledge and expertise of teacher librarians to guide the expansion of library services, especially at the elementary and middle school levels. Recommendation 3 Use the model standards to assess the needs of their school library programs and address any identified needs during their LCAP process Response San Juan Unified School District agrees with the recommendation. District staff will be assigned to support this process in collaboration with library staff across the district. The intent will be to deepen understanding of the model standards, to assess the extent to which the standards are being met, and to make recommendations on steps necessary to increase alignment with the model standards. This analysis will considered during the LCAP revision, in order to prioritize needs and allocate resources, as available. Recommendation 4 Require their schools to participate in Education’s annual school library survey Response San Juan’s rate of completion of the most recent survey was 85.5%, the highest cited in the report. If the request for completion of the survey or notification of the survey comes to a district office employee it will be possible to get full participation. A designee will be assigned in future years to communicate about the survey and follow up to ensure full participation by district schools. California State Auditor Report 2016-112 67 November 2016 68 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 69 November 2016 * * California State Auditor’s comment appears on page 71. 70 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 November 2016 1 California State Auditor Report 2016-112 71 November 2016 Comment CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR’S COMMENT ON THE RESPONSE FROM THE WOODLAKE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT To provide clarity and perspective, we are commenting on the Woodlake Unified School District’s (Woodlake Unified) response to our audit. The number below corresponds to the number we have placed in the margin of Woodlake Unified’s response. Woodlake Unified mischaracterizes our discussion of the model 1 standards in relation to the local control accountability plan (LCAP) requirements. We state at page 22, although the California Department of Education identifies the Model School Library Standards for California Public Schools, Kindergarten Through Grade Twelve (model standards) as one of the State’s academic content and performance standards, the LCAP template does not list any of the standards that school districts must address. We further conclude on page 23 that without additional guidance, school districts may not consider using the model standards during the LCAP process to identify weaknesses in their library programs and to develop goals to address those needs. We stand by our recommendation on page 33 that to strengthen their library programs school districts should use the model standards to assess the needs of their school library programs and address any identified needs during the LCAP process. Although Woodlake Unified indicates that it disagrees with our finding, it states that it will implement our recommendation.