Comprehensive Review Pupil Achievement

Compton Unified School District Pupil Achievement Comprehensive Review February 2002 Administrative Agent Larry E. Reider Office of Kern County Superintendent of Schools Chief Executive Officer Thomas E. Henry 1.2 Student Objectives – Core Curriculum Content Professional Standard The district has clear and valid objectives for students, including the core curriculum content. Consent Decree Stipulation This standard was identified in the Consent Decree in the action Serna v Eastin, Case No. BC 174282, as needing to reach a rating of 8 to be deemed compliant. Additional related stipulations (Section 13) include a monthly certification from the site principal that a homework policy is implemented at each site, and that information about the policy is sent to parents each semester and parents acknowledge receipt of the notification. Progress on Recommendations and Recovery Steps 1. Curriculum and Instruction administrators changed in spring and summer 2001, with a new Deputy Superintendent of Educational Support Services, a new Associate Super- intendent for grades 9-12, a new Associate Superintendent for grades K-8, a new Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction, and several new directors and coordinators. Many programs initiated by the previous instructional team are being reviewed and revised by the new leadership team. Current efforts seem to be redoing earlier efforts instead of building on them. Progress in this area is therefore not as pronounced as in other operational areas. 2. The district has clear goals and objectives for student performance and improvement but is in the process of revising its many curriculum documents. The district’s efforts have been focused on alignment of curriculum, standards and report cards. The goals and objectives for student learning can be seen in the various documents the district is revising and developing. The district, for example, is implementing the new K-5 report card developed last year that reflects the state curriculum standards. Teachers, parents and principals received training on use of the new report card. Additional parent training workshops on the report card are planned. 3. The report cards for the middle and high schools utilize the computer-generated A-F grade reporting system. The matrix used by the district in the past, that based a per- centage of the student’s grade on their SAT score, is no longer being used. Grades are based on in-class work, course standards, and teacher assessment. The goals and objectives for secondary level students can be seen in the Course Outlines and Course Descriptions that have been revised. 4. The K-12 curriculum guides used in the district for the last two years are being re- viewed, as are other curriculum documents developed by the district under the previ- ous leadership team. The district has scheduled the revision of the curriculum guides for summer 2002. The Math Pacing Guides for grades 6-8 were revised to include the new K-6 Saxon math textbooks acquired by the district. Pupil Achievement 1 5. The Open Court program is now being utilized in all K-5 classrooms. Open Court Pacing Guides have been developed and/or revised to assist teachers in the implemen- tation of the Open Court program. CORE basic literacy training has been provided for all principals. 6. Professional development programs offered by the district continue to be extensive with numerous training workshops being offered. A number of training workshops promote the effective teaching of reading: K-3 Reading Results Institute, Reading Intervention Program Training, Literacy Coaching, and After School Tutorial Pro- gram. Curriculum administrators have participated in Curriculum Audit training with Kaplan. Training in the use of the Language! Program, designed to teach older learn- ers to read, continues to be provided to teachers. 7. Other staff development workshops include a strong emphasis on providing support to English Language Learners (ELL) and helping teachers to implement the Open Court program with ELL students. Additional ELL training will be occurring with assistance from West Ed on ELD 1, 2, and 3 for grades 6-12, and a partnering effort with CTA on SDAIE training. A consultant has also been hired to provide teacher training on the needs of the ELL and special education student. The district has identified approxi- mately 19,000 ELL students in the district, roughly 50% of the district’s total enroll- ment. The district has addressed most ELL compliance issues, improving the criteria and procedures for supporting ELL students. The district has developed and published a handbook on procedures and forms “From Registration to Redesignation” for ser- vices to ELL students. 8. The district’s homework policy is included in the Parent Handbook distributed at the beginning of the year. A reminder to the principals will be sent at the beginning of the second semester to inform parents of the school’s homework policy. A monthly certifi- cation by site principals that a homework policy is being implemented continues to be a required submission to meet compliance with the Consent Decree stipulation. Parent acknowledgements of receipt of the homework policy are maintained at the site. Documentation of this process and paper trail should be provided at the next review to again verify the district’s compliance. 2 Pupil Achievement Standard Implemented: Partially Implemented February 1999 Rating: 0 August 1999 Rating: 2 February 2000 Rating: 3 August 2000 Rating: 5 February 2001 Rating: 6 August 2001 Rating: 6 February 2002 Self Rating: 8 February 2002 New Rating: 7 Implementation Scale: Not ➤ Fully Pupil Achievement 3 ➤ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1.4 Multiple Assessment Tools – Program Adjustment Professional Standard The district has adopted multiple assessment tools, including diagnostic assessments, to evaluate, improve, or adjust programs and resources. Consent Decree Stipulation This standard was identified in the Consent Decree in the action Serna v Eastin, Case No. BC 174282, as needing to reach a rating of 8 to be deemed compliant. Progress on Recommendations and Recovery Steps 1. All Board policies and administrative regulations were revised and adopted by the Advisory Board in the 1999-2000 school year to provide the framework for the district’s instructional program. 2. The district’s assessment plan for the 2000-2001 school year, developed in January 2001, was based on the directions provided by the State Administrator in September 2000. The Plan identified the SAT-9 as the basis for the identification and remediation of students around areas of critical instructional need. Each school received SAT-9 data analysis for the past three years. Testing coordinators at each site were identified. Test data information was to be used as the basis of the schools’ One Action Plan and the site Test Preparation Plan. 3. The new instructional leadership team has revised the district’s assessment plan for 2001-2002, although many of the plan elements remain the same. The research and evaluation director is new to the position, having joined the district in summer 2001. The Assessment Plan for 2001-2002 includes an overview list and schedule of the assessments for high schools, middle schools and elementary schools; detail on the Writing Assessment, the SAT-9, the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE), and the California English Language Development Test (CELDT); and copies of the revised report cards for grades K-5. 4. As reported in the last six-month progress report, the district has provided training in the Degrees of Reading Power (DRP) and the CELDT tests. These training offerings are continuing. School assessment plan templates have been developed and schools were assisted in developing current school improvement plans that address improving SAT-9 performance. Four writing assessments were conducted during the last school year. The assessments were aligned to the state frameworks, supported SAT-9 objectives, and included various types of writing tested at appropriate grade levels (narrative, descriptive, persuasive, expository, report, reflective writing). Three opportunities were provided during the last school year for students in grades 9-12 to satisfy the requirements of the District Proficiency Test. Schools were also involved in CAT-5 testing to provide students with an additional opportunity to acquire test readiness skills necessary for SAT-9 success. 4 Pupil Achievement 5. The district’s new assessment plan has eliminated the use of the CAT-5 test. However, the district’s multiple assessment tools continue to include the district coordinated writing assessments administered four times a year, and the high school proficiency test. An AIMS on-line web assessment has been initiated to monitor reading improve- ment in grades 1-3. Degrees of Reading Power (DRP) scores are used to determine students’ reading levels and if students can read the textbooks assigned. The DRP is administered twice a year. The Language! program test scores are used to place students in appropriate classes at the middle and high school level. Math and Algebra test scores are used to place students in appropriate math classes at the middle and high school level. Documentation was presented for Benchmark Assessments aligned with standards in all high school core subject areas. Most of the schools have a Cur- riculum Specialist or Resource Teacher who serves as the site testing coordinator. Meetings with these coordinators are held each quarter. 6. The district’s testing schedule has been revised and distributed to principals. A process for sites to request test data has been implemented. Each school is required to develop a site-testing plan for submittal to the district office. Current assessment training being provided deals with the testing schedule and getting reports and data to teachers. Very little training on data analysis and use of the data for improving instruction was seen, although the district has indicated it plans to use data to adjust instructional programs. The district might address how it is addressing the improvement of instructional programs at the next review visit. 7. School Academic Performance Index (API) scores are increasing, although there are still many schools, including the three high schools, that have not met their perfor- mance growth targets. The district will need to address the seriousness of possible state sanctions that may be imposed on schools participating in the Immediate/ Underperforming Schools Program (II/USP) that fail to meet their performance growth target for the second year. Standard Implemented: Partially Implemented February 1999 Rating: 0 August 1999 Rating: 2 February 2000 Rating: 4 August 2000 Rating: 6 February 2001 Rating: 6 August 2001 Rating: 6 February 2002 Self Rating: 8 February 2002 New Rating: 6 Implementation Scale: Not ➤ Fully Pupil Achievement 5 ➤ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1.5 Preparation of Students – Expectations and Practices Professional Standard Expectations and a practice exist to improve the preparation of students and to build a school structure with the capacity to serve all students. Consent Decree Stipulation This standard was identified in the Consent Decree in the action Serna v Eastin, Case No. BC 174282, as needing to reach a rating of 8 to be deemed compliant. Additional related stipulations (Section 19) include the development of a district policy on student promotion and conducting parent meetings to obtain input to the policy. Progress on Recommendations and Recovery Steps 1. As reported in earlier progress reports, the promotion/acceleration/retention policy, Policy No. 5123, was revised and adopted on April 11, 2000. Information on the policy is distributed to parents through the Parent Handbook, Guidelines for Parents. If a student is in danger of being retained, parents are notified early about the possibil- ity and about summer school options that are available to the student. In addition, grade level objectives continue to be mailed out to parents early in the school year. As first reported in the third six-month report, the district produced a series of parent booklets by grade level, “What Your Child Should Know,” to explain the subject content standards expected of students for Language Arts (Reading, Writ- ing, Listening and Speaking); Mathematics (Number Sense, Algebra and Functions, Measurement and Geometry, Statistics, Data Analysis, Probability, and Mathematical Reasoning); and History/Social Science. The booklets are published in English and Spanish. This communication attempts to focus students and parents on the pupil achievement standards students will be held to, and communicates the grade level grading standards that have been developed to assess student achievement. 2. Low student performance remains a major concern for district staff. Although school Academic Performance Index (API) scores are increasing, there are still many schools, including the three high schools, that have not met their 2001 API perfor- mance growth targets. Four district schools (Compton High, Laurel, Rosecrans and Walton) are CSRD implementation schools. Compton and Walton did not meet their 2000 API target, and Compton did not meet its 2001 API target. Ten schools are participating in the second year implementation phase of the Immediate Intervention/ Underperforming Schools Program (II/USP) and include Centennial High, Vanguard Middle, Willowbrook Middle, Willard Middle, Jefferson Elementary, Kennedy Elementary, Longfellow Elementary, Dickison Elementary, Washington Elementary, and Tibby Elementary. These schools are in the second year of implementation of their Action Plans to overcome identified barriers to improving student performance. Five of these ten 6 Pupil Achievement schools met their 2000 API growth target. Four of these ten schools did not meet their 2001 API growth target, two of them for the second year. Twelve additional schools (5 middle schools and 7 elementary schools) began the first year of the II/USP program in the 2000-2001 school year and prepared their Action Plans to address barriers that inhibit improved student performance. These schools are Bunche, Davis, Enterprise, Roosevelt and Whaley Middle Schools, and Anderson, Bursch, Foster, King, Lincoln, McKinley and Roosevelt Elementary Schools. Nine of these schools met their 2001 API growth target. These schools are in the first year of their Action Plan implementation. 3. The new instructional leadership team initiated several programs to address low student performance for implementation in the 2001-2002 school year. A seventh period class is offered to English language learners and low achievers (lower than 31% in math or reading) at the middle and high. This class is part of the student’s regular schedule. Secondary school master scheduling was developed based on stu- dent needs, and teacher assignments were fitted to meet those identified needs. Teach- ers are encouraged to develop class exams that are tied to performance standards. A collaborative with UC-Irvine provides nine minimum days for high school staff development in Learning English through SDAIE. Individual professional develop- ment plans are being developed for each teacher. Principals will include these indi- vidual staff development plans in the evaluation process. Bell schedules for schools were revised to include banked time for twenty minimum days for faculty professional development. Eleven of the days are for school-directed staff development and nine of the days are for district-directed staff development. Three Learning Support Coordinators have been assigned to each high school, in- creasing the administrative support staff. Summer school was made mandatory for students during the summer. A four-week session was provided for Kindergarten through grade two students, a six-week session for grades 3-9 and a seven-week session for grades 10-12. Summer school for grades 3-9 focused on literacy and numeracy. Ninth grade core course offerings were stream- lined and course selection for ninth graders restricted. Algebra is the entry level ninth grade math course. The district’s graduation requirements were reviewed and revi- sions made to align them to the high school exit exam. Middle schools are offering pre-Algebra at the seventh grade and Algebra at the eighth grade. Students at the high school who fail a first semester course must now repeat the failed portion of the course before moving on to the second semester level. Math mini- courses are provided for students who have not passed the CAHSEE high school exit exam. After school tutorials and Saturday school are provided at all high schools. Sylvan reading centers are provided after school at all elementary schools. Pupil Achievement 7 The district has acknowledged its large homeless population (1600 students). Transi- tional housing has been identified to assist in placing homeless students in foster care in local group homes. Assessment for appropriate placement will be administered whenever homeless students enter the system. The district will need to report on its assessment of the effectiveness of the many programs that have been initiated for the 2001-2002 school year at the next review visit at the end of the school year in June. 4. Title I requires states to implement accountability systems to annually review the academic progress of Title I schools and to identify Title I schools in need of improve- ment. As reported in the fourth six-month progress report, the district received a letter warning of several district Title I schools that were in Program Improvement for three years and may possibly be subject to state corrective actions during their fourth Program Improvement Year, 2000-01. Many district Title I schools, participating in the II/USP program, have been placed on a WATCH status, allowing time for remedy through implementation of their Action Plans. The district has resolved all Title I non- compliant items from the coordinated compliance review. The district will need to provide information on the progress of the Title I schools identified by the state at the next review visit. 5. As reported in the fourth six-month progress report, site administrators are expected to spend much of the school day in classrooms or working with teachers on instructional improvement. Principal observation logs are utilized to provide feedback to teachers on whether the principal observed the use of instructional strategies learned from training workshops in their classrooms. 6. Student college-going rates for 2001 were much improved over 2000. The number of students going to the University of California (UC) system increased from five in 2000 to 29 in 2001. Approximately 80 students went to the California State University (CSU) system and approximately 300 students went to community colleges in 2001. 7. The Key Results Visits, that were an important part of the district’s monitoring pro- cess in the past, is being changed under the new instructional leadership team. The district will need to share the new process with the review team at its next visit. 8 Pupil Achievement Standard Implemented: Partially Implemented February 1999 Rating: 0 August 1999 Rating: 3 February 2000 Rating: Not Reviewed August 2000 Rating: 5 February 2001 Rating: 5 August 2001 Rating: 5 February 2002 Self Rating: 8 February 2002 New Rating: 6 Implementation Scale: Not ➤ Fully Pupil Achievement 9 ➤ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1.10 Variety of Instructional Strategies – Student Diversity Professional Standard Teachers use a variety of instructional strategies and resources that address their students’ diverse needs. Consent Decree Stipulation This standard was identified in the Consent Decree in the action Serna v Eastin, Case No. BC 174282, as needing to reach a rating of 8 to be deemed compliant. Additional related stipulations (Section 24) include the development of a program in race rela- tions in an ongoing course of study for all students, and the encouragement of parent participa- tion in the program. Progress on Recommendations and Recovery Steps 1. To address the Consent Decree stipulation the district has purchased instructional materials on the Latino experience and the African-American experience. The district’s desegregation funds have increased the availability of Spanish supplemental materials in the school libraries. The district is offering an exploratory elective in Ethnic Studies during summer school, piloting the course for inclusion as an elective during the regular school year. The district intends to revise the History/Social Science curriculum to include further study of the various ethnic populations that are reflected in the student population. The district is celebrating Cesar Chavez’s birthday for the first time this school year with materials developed by the curriculum office for teacher use in the classroom. 2. A new staff development director was hired by the district in summer 2001. Minimum day schedules and banked minutes have been built into school schedules to provide for faculty professional development. The district has initiated a number of programs to address improving student performance in the last year, and staff development is a major component of each of these new initiatives (Open Court implementation, Language! Program implementation, Curriculum Audit Management training, Saxon math implementation, Algebra implementation, Project Based Learning, Degrees of Reading Power, CORE training for administrators/teachers, etc.). A number of exter- nal staff development consultants who were contracted by the district last school year are continuing with the district this school year. Expenditures for staff development and consultant help are costly. The district will need to assess the effectiveness of the training programs being implemented in terms of improvement in student perfor- mance, and prepare a cost analysis report of the various training programs being conducted for the next review visit. 3. The district has provided 8 math coaches to provide support to teachers at each of the middle schools and to develop demonstration model math classrooms. Two reading coaches, one for grades 1-6 and one for grades 6-12 are also available to provide teacher support in reading. 10 Pupil Achievement 4. Schools are responsible for initiating some staff development to meet their unique student needs and for submitting proposals for approval. School site staff development proposals must indicate how a proposed staff development activity will address identified student needs at the site. Principals are expected to visit classrooms to determine if strategies learned in staff development activities are used in the class- room. A staff development evaluation form has been developed for completion after each activity. 5. Training for Gifted and Academically Talented Education (GATE) and Advanced Placement (AP) teachers was conducted during the summer and continues throughout the school year. The number of students participating in Advanced Placement courses has increased to approximately 400 students. A pre-AP program has been developed for students at the middle schools, grades 6-8. Students in AP classes are expected to take the AP subject test at the end of the course. Passing rates of students are expected to increase. Students’ AP test fees are paid by the district with GATE funds. Standard Implemented: Partially Implemented February 1999 Rating: 0 August 1999 Rating: Not Reviewed February 2000 Rating: 3 August 2000 Rating: 4 February 2001 Rating: 4 August 2001 Rating: 5 February 2002 Self Rating: 8 February 2002 New Rating: 6 Implementation Scale: Not ➤ Fully Pupil Achievement 11 ➤ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1.11 Students Engaged in Learning Professional Standard Students are engaged in learning and they are able to demonstrate and apply their knowledge and skills. Consent Decree Stipulation This standard was identified in the Consent Decree in the action Serna v Eastin, Case No. BC 174282, as needing to reach a rating of 8 to be deemed compliant. Additional related stipulations (Section 13) include a homework policy implemented at each site with a monthly certification from the site principal that this is occurring, information sent to parents each semester and parent acknowledgment of the notification. Progress on Recommendations and Recovery Steps 1. A new research and evaluation director was hired by the district in summer 2001. The new instructional leadership team has revised the district’s assessment plan for 2001- 2002, although many of the plan elements remain the same. The Assessment Plan for 2001-2002 includes an overview list and schedule of the assessments for high schools, middle schools and elementary schools; detail on the Writing Assessment, the SAT-9, the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE), and the California English Lan- guage Development Test (CELDT); and copies of the revised report cards for grades K-5. Four writing assessments continue to be administered during the school year. The writing assessments included various types of writing tested at appropriate grade levels (narrative, descriptive, persuasive, expository, report, reflective writing). Data from the various assessment tools show that test scores are increasing. However, overall low student performance remains a concern for the district. Several schools have not met their 2001 API performance growth targets. Approximately 50% of the district’s students are English language learners who need additional instructional support. 2. The district provides several opportunities for students to showcase their work. A Literacy Fair allows students to provide responses to literature through writing and speech competitions. A Math/Science Expo is held, with MESA involvement, to showcase students’ math and science projects. MESA is an extra-curricular enrich- ment program in math and science that is offered to students at the middle and high schools. 3. The college-going rates for seniors has improved. Fifty percent of the 2001 senior class applied to institutions of higher learning. Twenty-nine students who graduated in 2001 were accepted to UC-Irvine. This has increased from five students in 2000. Approximately 80 students went to the CSU system and approximately 300 students went to community colleges. 12 Pupil Achievement 4. The district’s homework policy is included in the Parent Handbook distributed at the beginning of the year. A reminder to the principals will be sent at the beginning of the second semester to inform parents of the school’s homework policy. A monthly certifi- cation by site principals that a homework policy is being implemented continues to be a required submission to meet compliance with the Consent Decree stipulation. Parent acknowledgements of receipt of the homework policy are maintained at the site. Documentation of this process and paper trail should be provided at the next review to again verify the district’s compliance. Standard Implemented: Partially Implemented February 1999 Rating: 0 August 1999 Rating: Not Reviewed February 2000 Rating: 3 August 2000 Rating: 4 February 2001 Rating: 5 August 2001 Rating: 5 February 2002 Self Rating: 6 February 2002 New Rating: 6 Implementation Scale: Not ➤ Fully Pupil Achievement 13 ➤ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1.16 Common Vision – Practice Professional Standard A common vision of what all students should know and be able to do exists and is put into practice. Consent Decree Stipulation This standard was identified in the Consent Decree in the action Serna v Eastin, Case No. BC 174282, as needing to reach a rating of 8 to be deemed compliant. Additional related stipulations (Section 19) include the development of a district policy on student promotion and conducting parent meetings to obtain input to the policy. Progress on Recommendations and Recovery Steps 1. As reported in earlier progress reports, the promotion/acceleration/retention policy, Policy No. 5123, was revised and adopted on April 11, 2000. Information on the policy is distributed to parents through the Parent Handbook, Guidelines for Parents. If a student is in danger of being retained, parents are notified early about the possibil- ity and about summer school options that are available to the student. A process is in place to review new and proposed revised board policies on an ongoing basis. The instructional series, 6000, provides a curriculum framework for the district. 2. The district has been working to align instruction to curriculum and assessment. Report cards that were revised for grades K-5 provide clear expectations for student performance. However, documents describing the district’s vision statement are out- dated and need to be updated and/or appropriately revised. The district needs to ensure that its vision is widely and clearly communicated to all staff, students and commu- nity. 3. The district’s instructional program is in a phase of transition. Curriculum and Instruc- tion administrators changed in spring and summer 2001, with a new Deputy Superin- tendent of Educational Support Services, a new Associate Superintendent for grades 9-12, a new Associate Superintendent for grades K-8, a new Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction, and several new directors and coordinators. Many programs initiated by the previous instructional team are being reviewed and revised by the new leadership team. Current efforts seem to be redoing earlier efforts instead of building on them. 4. Several district administrators participated in Curriculum Audit training and attended the Phi Delta Kappa Conference on Cutting Edge Practices: Maximizing the Student Achievement Conference in San Diego. Numerous curriculum documents are being revised based on these training models. 5. There is no change in the rating for this standard. Additional time will be needed to assess the transition period and the numerous initiatives being implemented. 14 Pupil Achievement Standard Implemented: Partially Implemented February 1999 Rating: 0 August 1999 Rating: Not Reviewed February 2000 Rating: 4 August 2000 Rating: 5 February 2001 Rating: 6 August 2001 Rating: 6 February 2002 Self Rating: 8 February 2002 New Rating: 6 Implementation Scale: Not ➤ Fully Pupil Achievement 15 ➤ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1.20 Administrative Support and Coaching – Teachers Professional Standard Administrative support and coaching are provided to all teachers. Consent Decree Stipulation This standard was identified in the Consent Decree in the action Serna v Eastin, Case No. BC 174282, as needing to reach a rating of 8 to be deemed compliant. Progress on Recommendations and Recovery Steps 1. The district’s new instructional leadership team has embarked on a strong staff devel- opment effort for staff and administrators. Numerous staff development consultants and “coaches” have been contracted in the last several months. Staff development workshops provided since the review team’s previous visit included CORE training and CORE Coaching for principals and teachers presented by consultant Linda Dia- mond, workshops in Special Education provided by consultant Christine Hoffman, High School Project Based Learning provided by consultant Dana Erickson, and OPEN Court training conducted by consultants Kristy Khoury and Connie Tillman. 2. Coaching of teachers is provided by site administrators, curriculum specialists, UC subject matter consultants, and outside consultants. Principals have been trained in coaching strategies. Coaching and classroom support is expected to be consistent and frequent, especially for newly hired teachers and those with emergency credentials. Staff development for site principals, offered during the summer, focused on coach- ing, evaluating and monitoring teacher performance, analyzing student data and classroom instruction, and collaborating with teachers to identify strengths and areas needing improvement. 3. Two-hour workshops on the implementation of the Language! program are provided to teachers. A Language! monitoring form has been developed for classroom observ- ers to note the Language! Instructional techniques observed being implemented in the classroom. 4. School schedules have been modified for the new school year to include “banked time” for staff development. All high schools have 20 minimum days for professional development built into their schedule. Each faculty and staff member is expected to develop an individualized professional development plan. Nine of the 20 minimum days are district-directed to concentrate on course content and instructional strategies, as well as training in cultural diversity, crisis management, and conflict resolution. The other eleven days are site-directed based on site-determined student needs. 5. A draft of a new staff development plan was shared with the review team. A new staff development calendar has been developed. The calendar attempts to include in one document, all of the various staff development workshops provided by the various divisions in the district. It would be additionally helpful if the staff development 16 Pupil Achievement offerings were organized by type of training. Curricular staff development workshops are focused on reading and math. 6. The development of the new staff development documents are reminiscent of the efforts made by the district 1-2 years ago. The review team recommended at that time that the district needed to focus its staff development efforts and develop a cohesive plan for what the district wants to accomplish through its training programs. Progress was being made in this area. However, the current plethora of training being under- taken by the district, both district and site-initiated, again diffuses and confuses the district’s focus. Everything appears equally important. As discussed in Standard 1.10, the district will need to assess the effectiveness of the training programs being imple- mented in terms of improvement in student performance, and prepare a cost analysis report of the various training programs being conducted for the next review visit. 7. Efforts have been undertaken to also improve the district’s testing program as dis- cussed in Standard 1.4. Numerous staff development sessions have been conducted on administration of the various multiple assessment tools used by the district. The district’s assessment plan and testing calendar have been revised. Schools are required to develop site testing plans and instructional intervention plans for those students performing below the 31st percentile on the SAT-9. 8. The certificated evaluation form has been recently revised to include the California Standards for the Teaching Profession as desired teaching outcomes. Principals are familiar with the standards and are expected to observe classrooms and establish goals with teachers with these standards in mind. Principals are still required to be in the classrooms for 50% of the day to address instructional improvement. 9. The district is redoing much of what it has done before. As implementation of the many initiatives being undertaken in the district is at the preliminary stage, more time will be needed to assess progress. Standard Implemented: Partially Implemented February 1999 Rating: 0 August 1999 Rating: 3 February 2000 Rating: 4 August 2000 Rating: 5 February 2001 Rating: 6 August 2001 Rating: 6 February 2002 Self Rating: 10 February 2002 New Rating: 7 Implementation Scale: Not ➤ Fully Pupil Achievement 17 ➤ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1.21 Professional Development – Personnel Evaluation Professional Standard Professional development is linked to personnel evaluation. Consent Decree Stipulation This standard was identified in the Consent Decree in the action Serna v Eastin, Case No. BC 174282, as needing to reach a rating of 8 to be deemed compliant. Progress on Recommendations and Recovery Steps 1. The district and teachers association have successfully negotiated a revised evaluation form for certificated employees that includes the teacher performance standards from the California Standards for the Teaching Profession. The six standards are: 1. Engaging and supporting all students in learning. 2. Creating and maintaining effective environments for student learning. 3. Understanding and organizing subject matter for student learning. 4. Planning instruction and designing learning experiences for all students. 5. Assessing student learning. 6. Developing as a professional educator related duties and responsibilities. Standard six indicates a direct relationship between staff development and personnel evaluation. 2. Principals have received an orientation to the California Standards for the Teaching Profession and observe classrooms with these standards in mind. Goals established with teachers often include these standards. 3. The district’s Peer Assistance and Review Program (PAR) provides a link between professional development and individual teacher performance. The PAR program provides a plan of assistance to teachers who are performing at a less than satisfactory level, and provides coaching support to probationary teachers. 4. Principals are expected to spend fifty percent of their day in the classroom or in related instructional activities. Principals assess whether strategies learned in staff development, e.g. Language!, are being implemented in the classroom. Principals’ evaluations include their effectiveness in supervising faculty and staff, and monitoring curriculum. 5. The numerous staff development efforts undertaken by the district, and described elsewhere in this report, are provided to improve the skills and performance of the instructional staff, and therefore the achievement and performance of the district’s students. 18 Pupil Achievement Standard Implemented: Partially Implemented February 1999 Rating: 0 August 1999 Rating: 3 February 2000 Rating: 4 August 2000 Rating: 5 February 2001 Rating: 5 August 2001 Rating: 5 February 2002 Self Rating: 10 February 2002 New Rating: 7 Implementation Scale: Not ➤ Fully Pupil Achievement 19 ➤ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1.23 Initial Student Placement – Procedures Professional Standard Initial placement procedures are in place to ensure the timely and appropriate placement of all students with particular emphases being placed on students with special needs. Consent Decree Stipulation This standard was identified in the Consent Decree in the action Serna v Eastin, Case No. BC 174282, as needing to reach a rating of 8 to be deemed compliant. Progress on Recommendations and Recovery Steps Special Education: 1. The special education director is another administrator new to the district. The district continues to work to appropriately place special needs students in a timely manner. The district’s triennials and IEP’s were again out of compliance in the recent compli- ance review, but the district has resolved all non-compliant special education issues at this time. 2. The district continues its use of the Special Education Management Information System (SEMIS). The district is able to monitor, by site, any overdue triennial or IEP on a monthly basis to take timely action. The special education office developed a document, “Special Education Compliance Protocols and Procedures 2000-2001,” summarizing the administrative responsibilities of site administrators in the SST, IEP, and 504 processes. 3. A referral tracking system for special needs health assessments continues to be moni- tored. An updated student list is provided to nurses by early October for students needing triennial assessments. 4. Last year, the district had approximately 100 special education teachers and all schools had at least one full-time resource specialist teacher position. The district psychologists have been reassigned to individual school sites to provide services and assessments to students. A staffing plan for special education is being developed. 5. The curriculum for special education is enhanced by 270 lessons in the Language! Program for use with ELD and special education students in grades 6-12. A workabil- ity program resource center has been established at Willowbrook Middle School. The center is designed to meet the instructional and career education needs of students in middle school special education classes. English Language Learners: 6. The director for the Office of Bilingual Education has been in this position for a year- and-a-half. As reported in earlier six-month progress reports, Board Policy No. 6174 Education for English Language Learners was revised. 20 Pupil Achievement 7. The district responded to all OCR complaints in July 2001. The district has resolved all non-compliant issues identified by CDE in its Consolidated Application compli- ance review. However, to address OCR non-compliance issues, the district has agreed to having its EIA funds impounded and released in allotments upon completion of the OCR requirements. The district developed its Accountability Plan for English Lan- guage Learners. It also developed a manual of procedures and forms titled “Registra- tion to Redesignation” to serve English language learners, and is awaiting CDE and OCR approval of the document. The district developed ELL district benchmarks, and ELL checklists for both elementary and secondary principals to monitor the ELL programs at their sites. 8. All English language learners were reassessed using the California English Language Development Test (CELDT) to meet an October 24, 2001 deadline from the CDE. The district completed CELDT testing of more than 18,000 ELL students in the district in the last few months to meet the deadline. 139 teachers and 190 instructional aides were trained in May and June, 2001 in the proper administration of the CELDT. All students are assessed using the SAT-9, CORE Assessment Procedures, and CELDT. 9. The district has developed new program descriptions for program placement. The district provides Structured English Immersion classes and two Spanish immersion programs at Emerson and Tibby Elementary Schools. Course descriptions have been written for Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English (SDAIE) for all courses required for graduation. English language development (ELD) course descrip- tions have been written for English language development. 10. Additional training has been provided to school site administrators and personnel on the importance of the Home Language Survey and intake assessment procedures for proper placement of ELL students. Although new Language Assessment files and forms to accurately document ELL program data were developed and reported on in the fourth six-month progress report, student files which were randomly reviewed by district staff last year were still incomplete and needed to be corrected. 11. The district continues to conduct extensive staff development for its teachers in ELL and Open Court/ELL. As reported in the last six-month report, 851 teachers of the 1277 teachers in the district, were on emergency credentials. The instructional staff reported that the Office for Civil Rights wanted all 1277 teachers included in the ELL training. The district is tracking teacher participation in ELL training by school. Appropriately trained teachers at each site are needed to provide the necessary ser- vices to ELL students. 12. ELL Intensive Literacy Program funds were accepted by the board, and eight schools were involved in the summer literacy program. The board accepted the ELAP funds for fiscal year 2000-01. Tibby and Emerson elementary schools are Title VII Dual Language schools. Both receive funds to build capacity through staff development and use of resources and instructional materials to improve instruction in the classroom. Materials have been purchased for all levels. Grades K-5 have available: Hampton- Browne, Into English, SRA, and Open Court; Grades 6-12 have available: Heinle- Heinle, Voices in Literature, Glencoe, and Language!. Pupil Achievement 21 13. The district continues implementing a Voluntary Resolution Plan (VRP) to address issues raised by the Office for Civil Rights. The district has hired a Compliance Officer to respond to complaints or issues. As reported in the fourth six-month progress report, the district contracted with WestEd for technical assistance in meeting the requirements of the VRP. WestEd, in its January 15, 2001 status report to the district, reported that the district was making satisfactory progress in meeting the requirements of the VRP. 14. The district is making good progress in addressing compliance issues. The CELDT testing of 18,000 students was a tremendous undertaking. Standard Implemented: Partially Implemented February 1999 Rating: 0 August 1999 Rating: 1 February 2000 Rating: 3 August 2000 Rating: 4 February 2001 Rating: 4 August 2001 Rating: 4 February 2002 Self Rating: 8 February 2002 New Rating: 6 Implementation Scale: Not ➤ Fully 22 Pupil Achievement ➤ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1.25 Instructional Materials – Student Accessibility Professional Standard The district will ensure that all instructional materials are accessible to all students. Consent Decree Stipulation This standard was identified in the Consent Decree in the action Serna v Eastin, Case No. BC 174282, as needing to reach a rating of 8 to be deemed compliant. Additional related stipulations (Section 8) include that each student will be assigned a textbook in core subject areas at the beginning of a course of study, that children will be able to take home textbooks or study materials, that a textbook inventory is developed by February 1st and that a textbook replacement plan is developed. Progress on Recommendations and Recovery Steps 1. As reported in earlier six-month progress reports, each classroom has a complete set of textbooks. In addition, individual textbooks for students to take home are available in core subject areas. Students may be using textbooks from a previous adoption cycle in some subject areas. 2. The district has a textbook replacement plan in place. Written procedures for the textbook procurement system are available, and all principals have been trained on the system. 3. In the 1999-2000 school year, the district adopted textbooks in Language Arts and mathematics. In the 2000-2001 school year, the district adopted textbooks in Science, History/Social Science and Advanced Placement. The adopted texts for Language Arts, mathematics and history/social science have been purchased and disseminated for student use. During the 2001-2002 school year, the adopted social science text- book purchases were completed. The purchase of the adopted science textbooks are on hold until the reading, mathematics and social science requirements have been filled. Students in grades 9-12 have individual textbooks assigned in Language Arts, math- ematics and social science in addition to the class sets. The class set enables students to leave their assigned copy at home. The district’s textbook acquisition focus for the 2002-2003 school year is either to purchase the newly adopted science texts, or the new adoption cycle of Language Arts texts because of OCR compliance issues. 4. The district continues to expend a large part of its budget on instructional materials for students. Textbooks are purchased annually with district funds allocated for this purpose. In the 2001-2002 school year, $1.3 million in Schiff-Bustamante instruc- tional materials funds was allocated to the sites at $41.86 per enrolled student based on October CBEDS counts. Additional textbook funds of $747,542 in K-8 state instructional materials funds was allocated to the elementary and middle school sites at $33.08 per student based on the P2 ADA, and $105,359 in 9-12 state instructional materials funds was allocated to the three high school sites at $20.74 per student based Pupil Achievement 23 on the P2 ADA. Supplemental instructional materials are purchased with EIA-LEP funds for English Language Learners. One million dollars was spent to provide addi- tional texts for the past year’s summer school program for Saxon math texts and Open Court texts and materials. The district has expended a minimum of $3 million total for textbooks in the 2001-2002 school year. 5. The district has established a library book volume goal of a minimum of 13 books per student. Site librarians and library assistants are also responsible for preparing text- books for student use and distributing them expeditiously to the classrooms. Library staff is responsible for collecting texts at the end of the year, notifying students of lost book charges and ordering replacement books for the following year. Efforts are being made at the school sites to retrieve textbooks from students at the end of the school year. Lost textbook monies are collected from students if textbooks are not returned. 6. Textbook availability is monitored by a review of the textbook assignment forms, lost textbook collection process, and the purchase order requests made for replacement copies. As reported in the fourth six-month progress report, a teacher on special assignment monitors the lost book tracking system. Teachers collect assigned books at the end of the school year. The district places orders for replacement texts for the new school year. Students are assessed for the cost of any lost book. A Gateway System software program is being used for textbook inventory. Standard Implemented: Partially Implemented February 1999 Rating: 4 August 1999 Rating: Not Reviewed February 2000 Rating: Not Reviewed August 2000 Rating: 5 February 2001 Rating: 5 August 2001 Rating: 5 February 2002 Self Rating: 7 February 2002 New Rating: 6 Implementation Scale: Not ➤ Fully 24 Pupil Achievement ➤ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2.3 Class Time – Protected for Student Learning Legal Standard Class time is protected for student learning. (EC 32212) Consent Decree Stipulation This standard was identified in the Consent Decree in the action Serna v Eastin, Case No. BC 174282, as needing to reach a rating of 8 to be deemed compliant. Progress on Recommendations and Recovery Steps 1. The updated Board policies and administrative regulations have institutionalized the practice of protecting class time for student learning. 2. The protection of class time for instruction and student learning continues to be a required element in each school’s improvement plan. Strategies are developed by teachers at each site, made part of the school improvement plan, and posted in each classroom. Strategies include ways to reduce classroom interruptions. Guidelines for the school PIE plans (Planning, Implementing and Evaluating) have been developed. 3. During the last two years, Key Results Visitation teams monitored the implementation of these strategies through site visits and observations. The checklist used by the Key Results Visitation teams indicated the findings of the team in several instructional areas, including lesson delivery and condition of the classrooms, the availability of instructional materials, the availability of a variety of safety net strategies to support at-risk students, and the protection of instructional time. Summary reports of the team’s findings were shared with the administration after the visitation was concluded. The report made recommendations for follow-up action before the team’s next visita- tion. The new instructional leadership team has indicated that the Key Results Visita- tion team model is being changed. The visits have not been occurring this year but are due to be reinstated in March after modification of the model. 4. Instructional time for students continues to be extended beyond the regular instruc- tional day and year with opportunities for Saturday school, after school tutorial pro- grams, and summer extended year programs. Summer school was made mandatory this past summer for several grade levels of students. Pupil Achievement 25 Standard Implemented: Fully Implemented – Substantial February 1999 Rating: 6 August 1999 Rating: Not Reviewed February 2000 Rating: Not Reviewed August 2000 Rating: 7 February 2001 Rating: 8 August 2001 Rating: 8 February 2002 Self Rating: 10 February 2002 New Rating: 9 Implementation Scale: Not ➤ Fully 26 Pupil Achievement ➤ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2.6 General Instructional Programs Legal Standard The general instructional program adheres to all requirements put forth in EC 51000-52950. Consent Decree Stipulation This standard was identified in the Consent Decree in the action Serna v Eastin, Case No. BC 174282, as needing to reach a rating of 8 to be deemed compliant. Progress on Recommendations and Recovery Steps 1. The district complies with the mandates of the Education Code 51000 through 52950. As reported in earlier six-month progress reports, the district has implemented the recommen- dation to adopt updated board policies and has established procedures for reviewing board policies on a regular basis. New or proposed revised board policies are submitted for review at each board meeting, and acted upon at a subsequent board meeting. 2. The district is making progress in bringing special programs into compliance. The district is compliant with all state Consolidated Application items. The district is not in compliance on all requirements of the English Language Learner program, and has been referred as a Comite district. However, the district has developed a plan and timeline for the resolution of all identified issues. The steps the district has taken toward compliance resolution can be found in greater detail in Standard 1.23. 3. The district is implementing a standards-based curriculum. Curriculum guides reflect- ing the state standards and identifying benchmarks, are available for all grade levels. Pacing guides to cover the standards have been developed for instructional use in several core areas such as: Language Arts 6-12, literature K-5, mathematics 6-8 and mathematics 9 (Algebra). An Open Court/English Language Learner Notebook has been developed for teachers to assist ELL students in using the Open Court texts and materials. The state curriculum standards are reflected on the revised report cards, K-5. Standard Implemented: Fully Implemented – Substantial February 1999 Rating: 5 August 1999 Rating: 6 February 2000 Rating: 6 August 2000 Rating: 7 February 2001 Rating: 7 August 2001 Rating: 7 February 2002 Self Rating: 8 February 2002 New Rating: 8 Implementation Scale: Not ➤ Fully Pupil Achievement 27 ➤ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2.9 Accountability – Maximum Educational Opportunity Legal Standard The district shall be accountable for student results by using evaluative information regarding the various levels of proficiency and allocating educational resources to assure the maximum educa- tional opportunity for all students. (EC 60609) Consent Decree Stipulation This standard was identified in the Consent Decree in the action Serna v Eastin, Case No. BC 174282, as needing to reach a rating of 8 to be deemed compliant. Progress on Recommendations and Recovery Steps 1. A new research and evaluation director has been hired, and the district’s assessment plan has been newly modified, although many of the plan elements remain the same. The Assessment Plan for 2001-2002 includes an overview list and schedule of the assessments for high schools, middle schools and elementary schools; detail on the Writing Assessment, the SAT-9, the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE), and the California English Language Development Test (CELDT); and copies of the revised report cards for grades K-5. 2. The district’s new assessment plan has eliminated the use of the CAT-5 test. However, the district’s multiple assessment tools continue to include the district coordinated writing assessments administered four times a year, and the high school proficiency test. Other assessment tools are discussed in further detail in Standard 1.4. Most of the schools have a Curriculum Specialist or Resource Teacher who serves as the site testing coordinator. Meetings between these site coordinators and the district’s testing director are held each quarter. 3. The district’s testing schedule has been revised and distributed to principals. A process for sites to request test data has been implemented. Each school is required to develop a site-testing plan for submittal to the district office. Schools have been provided with 4-year comparative data of SAT-9 test results for all sub groups of students, to monitor student progress and plan for student improvement. Current assessment training deals with the testing schedule and getting reports and data to teachers. Very little training on data analysis and use of the data for improving instruction was seen, although the district has indicated it plans to use data to adjust instructional programs. The district might address how it is addressing the improvement of instructional programs. 4. High school staff is meeting to address ways to prepare students to pass the high school exit exam (CAHSEE). Preparation for the CAHSEE needs to also involve the staff of the elementary and middle schools as the high school teachers alone cannot prepare students for this new state requirement. 5. District curriculum administrators have attended level one of the Curriculum Manage- ment Audit Training, and plan to attend levels two and three. 28 Pupil Achievement Standard Implemented: Partially Implemented February 1999 Rating: 2 August 1999 Rating: Not Reviewed February 2000 Rating: Not Reviewed August 2000 Rating: 5 February 2001 Rating: 6 August 2001 Rating: 6 February 2002 Self Rating: 9 February 2002 New Rating: 7 Implementation Scale: Not ➤ Fully Pupil Achievement 29 ➤ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2.10 Measurement of Student Achievement Legal Standard Student achievement will be measured using standardized achievement tests and a variety of measurement tools, i.e., portfolios, projects, oral reports, etc. (EC 60602, 60605) Consent Decree Stipulation This standard was identified in the Consent Decree in the action Serna v Eastin, Case No. BC 174282, as needing to reach a rating of 8 to be deemed compliant. Progress on Recommendations and Recovery Steps 1. All Board policies and administrative regulations were revised and adopted by the Advisory Board in the 1999-2000 school year and provide the framework for the district’s instructional program. 2. This standard also has been discussed in Standards 1.4 and 2.9. As reported earlier in this report, a new research and evaluation director has been hired, and the district’s assessment plan has been newly modified, although many of the plan elements remain the same. The Assessment Plan for 2001-2002 includes an overview list and schedule of the assessments for high schools, middle schools and elementary schools; detail on the Writing Assessment, the SAT-9, the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE), and the California English Language Development Test (CELDT); and copies of the revised report cards for grades K-5. 3. The district’s new assessment plan has eliminated the use of the CAT-5 test. However, the district’s multiple assessment tools continue to include the district coordinated writing assessments administered four times a year, and the high school proficiency test. Other assessment tools are discussed in further detail in Standard 1.4. Most of the schools have a Curriculum Specialist or Resource Teacher who serves as the site testing coordinator. Meetings between these site coordinators and the district’s testing director are held each quarter. School site testing coordinators received training on their job tasks and responsibilities. A draft School Coordinator’s Manual developed by the CDE was used in the training. 4. Several training workshops on the district’s assessment tools have been, and continue to be, provided to administrators and teachers. Principals have participated in writing rubric training during summer 2001, and are currently participating in CORE training. Principals have also participated in training regarding the Academic Performance Index (API) during summer 2001. Teachers have participated in AIMS web training. K-5 teachers and administrators participated in Standards Based Report Card training. Extensive training on administering the CELDT test was provided to teachers and test examiners. The Los Angeles County Office of Education (LACOE) is providing informational workshops on the high school exit exam (CAHSEE) for school repre- sentatives and parents. 30 Pupil Achievement 5. The report cards used in grades 6-12 are generated using the Report Card Maker software, a relatively new process being used in the district. Meetings have been held between the technology department and staff to improve the process utilizing the software. Standard Implemented: Partially Implemented February 1999 Rating: 0 August 1999 Rating: Not Reviewed February 2000 Rating: Not Reviewed August 2000 Rating: 5 February 2001 Rating: 6 August 2001 Rating: 6 February 2002 Self Rating: 9 February 2002 New Rating: 7 Implementation Scale: Not ➤ Fully Pupil Achievement 31 ➤ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 32 Pupil Achievement Chart of Pupil Achievement Standards Pupil Achievement 33 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Progress Ratings Toward Implementation of the Recovery Plan 34 Pupil Achievement Pupil Achievement Feb. Aug. Feb. Aug. Feb. Aug. Feb. Aug. Timeline/ Standard to be addressed 1999 1999 2000 2000 2001 2001 2002 2002 Goal Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating Focus The district through its adopted policy provides a clear 1.1 0 3 5 7 8 NR NR Implemented operational framework for management of the curriculum. The district has clear and valid objectives for students, ❑ 1.2* 0 2 3 5 6 6 7 June2002 including the core curriculum content. The district directs its resources 1.3 fairly and consistently to 0 2 4 5 6 NR NR June2002 accomplish its objectives. The district has adopted multiple assessment tools, including ❑ 1.4* diagnostic assessments, to 0 2 4 6 6 6 6 June2003 evaluate, improve, or adjust programs and resources. Expectations and a practice exist to improve the preparation of ❑ 1.5* students and to build school 0 3 NR 5 5 5 6 June2003 structure with the capacity to serve all students. The assessment tools are clear measures of what is being taught 1.6 0 NR NR 4 6 NR NR June2002 and provide clear direction for improvement. Staff development provides staff with the knowledge and the 1.7 3 4 5 6 7 NR NR June2002 skills to improve instruction and the curriculum. Staff development demonstrates a clear understanding of 1.8 3 5 6 7 7 NR NR June2002 purpose, written goals, and appropriate evaluations. Evaluations provide constructive 1.9 feedback for improving job 0 3 4 5 5 NR NR June2002 performance. Teachers use a variety of instructional strategies and ❑ 1.10* 0 NR 3 4 4 5 6 June2003 resources that address their students' diverse needs. NR not reviewed ❑ targeted for review * must reach score of 8 Pupil Achievement 35 per consent decree Pupil Achievement (continued) Feb. Aug. Feb. Aug. Feb. Aug. Feb. Aug. Timeline/ Standard to be addressed 1999 1999 2000 2000 2001 2001 2002 2002 Goal Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating Focus Students are engaged in learning and they are able to demonstrate ❑ 1.11* 0 NR 3 4 5 5 6 June2005 and apply their knowledge and skills. The standards developed by the California Standards for the 1.12 0 NR 3 5 5 5 NR June2001 Teaching Profession are present and supported. Teachers modify and adjust 1.13 instructional plans according to 0 NR 3 4 4 5 NR June2003 student needs and success. Challenging learning goals and 1.14 instructional plans and programs 0 NR 3 4 5 5 NR June2003 for all students are evident. The administration and staff utilize assessment information to 1.15 0 1 4 5 6 NR NR June2002 improve learning opportunities for all students. A common vision of what all students should know and be ❑ 1.16* 0 NR 4 5 6 6 6 June2003 able to do exists and is put into practice. Goals and grade level 1.17 performance standards based on 3 NR 4 5 5 5 NR June2001 a common vision are present. Every elementary school has embraced the 1997 California 1.18 6 NR 6 7 8 NR NR Implemented School Recognition Program Standards. Efforts will be made by the district to partnership with state 1.19 colleges and universities to 8 NR 8 9 10 NR NR Implemented provide appropriate courses accessible to all teachers. Administrative support and ❑ 1.20* coaching are provided to all 0 3 4 5 6 6 7 June2001 teachers. Professional development is ❑ 1.21* 0 3 4 5 5 5 7 June2001 linked to personnel evaluation. Collaboration exists between higher education, district, 1.22 professional associations and 7 NR NR 8 9 NR NR Implemented community in providing professional development. NR not reviewed ❑ targeted for review 36 Pupil Achievement * must reach score of 8 per consent decree Pupil Achievement (continued) Feb. Aug. Feb. Aug. Feb. Aug. Feb. Aug. Timeline/ Standard to be addressed 1999 1999 2000 2000 2001 2001 2002 2002 Goal Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating Focus Initial placement procedures are in place to ensure the timely and appropriate placement of all ❑ 1.23* 0 1 3 4 4 4 6 June2003 students with particular emphases being placed on students with special needs. Clearly defined discipline practices have been established 1.24 and communicated among the 8 NR NR 8 9 NR NR Implemented students, staff, board and community. The district will ensure that all ❑ 1.25* instructional materials are 4 NR NR 5 5 5 6 June2001 available to all students. The district has adopted a plan 1.26 for integrating technology into 0 4 5 6 7 NR NR June2002 the curriculum. The district's planning process ensures focus and connectivity 1.27 0 NR NR 4 5 5 NR June2002 to increased student productivity. Human Resources practices 1.28 support the delivery of sound 0 NR NR 5 5 5 NR June2004 educational programs. AIDS prevention instruction occurs at least once in junior high or middle school and once 2.1 8 NR 8 8 9 NR NR Implemented in high school and is consistent with the CDE's 1994 Health Framework. On a yearly basis, the district notifies all 11th and 12th grade 2.2 students regarding the California 6 NR NR 7 8 NR NR Implemented High School Proficiency Examination. Class time is protected for ❑ 2.3* 6 NR NR 7 8 8 9 Implemented student learning. Categorical and compensatory program funds supplement, and 2.4 do not supplant services and 0 3 4 5 6 NR NR June2002 materials to be provided by the district. A requirement is in place for passing of a basic skills 2.5 8 NR NR 8 10 NR NR Implemented proficiency examination by instructional aides. NR not reviewed ❑ targeted for review * must reach score of 8 Pupil Achievement 37 per consent decree Pupil Achievement (continued) Feb. Aug. Feb. Aug. Feb. Aug. Feb. Aug. Timeline/ Standard to be addressed 1999 1999 2000 2000 2001 2001 2002 2002 Goal Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating Focus The general instruction program ❑ 2.6* adheres to all requirements set 5 6 6 7 7 7 8 Implemented forth in (EC 51000-52950). All incoming kindergarten students will be admitted 2.7 following board-approved 8 NR NR 9 10 NR NR Implemented policies and administrative regulations. The district shall inform parents of the test scores of their 2.8 8 NR NR 9 10 NR NR Implemented children, and provide general explanation of these scores. The district shall be accountable for student results by using evaluative information regarding the various levels of proficiency ❑ 2.9* 2 NR NR 5 6 6 7 June2004 and allocating educational resources to assure the maximum educational opportunity for all students. Student achievement will be measured using standardized achievement tests and a variety ❑ 2.10* 0 NR NR 5 6 6 7 June2003 of measurement tools, ie., portfolios, projects, oral reports, etc. NR not reviewed ❑ targeted for review 38 Pupil Achievement * must reach score of 8 per consent decree