In This Issue:
 |
| • |
PUBLIC LETTER ACCOMPANYING STATE AUDITORS REPORT ON REPORTING CHILD ABUSE IN LAUSD |
|
| • |
STUDENT SCORES MAY BE USED IN LAUSD TEACHER RATINGS |
|
| • |
KEEPING
CALIFORNIA'S KIDS HEALTHY: Budget cuts forced the demise of the Healthy
Families program, but children must have access to care. |
|
| • |
LETTER TO DR. JAIME AQUINO FROM SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPALS + A CONCERN ABOUT FAIRNESS IN RESTORING CUTS |
|
| • |
HIGHLIGHTS, LOWLIGHTS & THE NEWS THAT DOESN'T FIT: The Rest (but
not necessarily the best) of the Stories from Other Sources |
|
| • |
EVENTS: Coming up next week... |
|
| • |
What can YOU do? |
|
Featured Links:
|
|
|
|
In a time of polarity compromise is simultaneously unwelcome, expedient and necessary.
I am currently reading “Year of Meteors”, a history of the election of
1860 and the first year of the Lincoln administration – perhaps to put
the recent Lincoln celebrity into perspective. Author Douglas Egerton
wordsmiths a spectacularly unflattering reference to Sen. Stephen A.
Douglas’ (“Rarely has a single politician wrought so much havoc”)
approach to political compromise: “Faced with this impasse, Douglas,
having previously failed with ambiguity, now sought refuge in utter
duplicity.”
On Friday the superintendent announced a “historic and very positive”
compromise – as LAUSD and UTLA came to some sort of settlement on
teacher assessment and evaluation based on student test scores.
[STUDENT SCORES MAY BE USED IN LAUSD TEACHER RATINGS] That mission is
Deasy’s own – driven by the unusual suspect ®eformers and a lawsuit (Doe
v.Deasy) where the plaintiff anonymous Does and the respondent Deasy
are on the same side. As is usual the tentative agreement – which was
mandated+deadlined by the court - is embedded as an amendment into the
UTLA contract -- because The Contract is The Most Important Document in
the Universe of Los Angeles Education.
Deasy’s historic+positive agreement is characterized as “limited”- a
waypoint not a milestone - in the perpetual contract renegotiation by
UTLA leadership …but seems to pass sound-byte muster with the curious
trinity of Diane Ravitch, Charles Kerchner and Monica Garcia. Hopefully
the Does and the ®eformers and the judge will accept it – and hopefully
history will judge it a little more generously than Stephen Douglas’
Kansas-Nebraska Act. Hopefully this compromise between competing adults
won’t compromise the children. Hopefully.
I AM STILL PORING OVER THE STATE AUDIT of the LAUSD Child Abuse Reporting [https://bit.ly/11lrqQs] released Thursday
The audit comes in four flavors.
There is the PRESS RELEASE. That’s what the media mostly covers. Who. What. When. Where. Why.
There is the PUBLIC LETTER to the Governor and Legislators: A
page-and-a-third outlining the legal and legislative issues. I guess
that that’s what the politicos react to; mostly. (It follows)
There is the SUMMARY REPORT [https://bit.ly/WxpOyR] – what used to be
called the executive summary – before executive summaries got too
verbose for the legislators’ attention spans. Everything you need to
know.
And there’s the WHOLE REPORT, which tends towards repetition because it
includes the Letter and The Summary Report before it expands ad
infinitum into the entirety of itself. At sixty-some-odd pages it’s not
all that long – but it’s hardly a ripping yarn. More than you ever
wanted to know – unless you’re a wonk.
You have to work at it to tease the good bits out.
THE FIRST BIT I FOUND was that the effort is mostly written in the past
tense. After all, it recounts what was done, what was alleged to have
been done, what should’ve been done and what wasn’t done in the past –
all very “Just the facts, ma’am”.
“Chapter 1: The District Often Failed to Notify the Commission on
Teacher Credentialing About Certain Outcomes in Child Abuse Allegations
“Chapter 2: The District Generally Followed Reporting Requirements, but
It Could Not Explain Some Delays in Investigating and Disciplining
Employees”
Sure, a little of it is the present tense: Corrective actions, recommendations etc.
The title is in the present tense: “Los Angeles Unified School
District—It Could Do More to Improve Its Handling of Child Abuse
Allegations”.
Not the District should’ve done more …or it didn’t do enough. Or even: … the District promises to do more.
….it COULD Do More.
Point made and taken.
SOME OF THE HISTORY IS ALMOST AMUSING. If you recall, the Commission on
Teacher Credentialing faxed the Superintendent a letter in Feb. 2011 [http://bit.ly/WCiwKe]
accusing him of failing to report child abuse as he personally is
required to by law: “failure make the report required constitutes
unprofessional conduct”. He apparently never got the letter (it was
faxed to the wrong floor) and instead got to hear it quoted in the news
media.
I would be angry too! Who does that Commission on Teacher Credentialing
think they are? He reacted by gathering up and sending the commission
something like 600 reports of potential abuse – forcing LAUSD troops
under his command to write up every case going back a number of years.
Differing news report s quote different numbers – 600 is the number
quoted in the Audit.
The auditors either have no sense of humor – or a very wry one.
Their withering criticism here is: “The superintendent of schools
directed district officials and principals to undertake two separate
projects intended to improve district reporting processes. One of the
projects—the commission reporting project—led to about 600 cases being
reported to the commission in a span of three months. However, this
large increase in the number of cases reported included many not
requiring reporting and caused a needless increase in workload for the
commission. Our review of the information the district provided to the
commission found that the district failed to report as required at least
144 cases— including cases involving employee misconduct against
students— and they were submitted a year or more late when the district
finally did report them. Of the 144 cases, 31 were more than three years
late when they were reported to the commission. This lack of reporting
resulted from systematic problems within the district, such as
inconsistent office
processes. As a result of the delays in reporting these cases, the
commission was not able to determine promptly whether it was appropriate
to revoke the teachers’ certificates and thus prevent the individuals
from working in other school
districts.”
(The second project still hasn’t been finished.)
My reading of this is that LAUSD’s failure to report in a timely manner
not only failed to adequately protect LAUSD students from potential
abuse– but may have put kids in other districts in harm’s way – and may
continue to do so. …and the “needless increase in workload” for the
commission was – well – needless.
On page 21 and 22 of the Audit it discusses the District protocol for
notifying (or not notifying) parents and guardians of potential or
alleged abuse by employees.
“Although some might believe that it would be advisable for the district
to notify the community, parents, and guardians about an allegation of
abuse by a certificated or classified employee, there are no legal
requirements that it do so. In fact, the district has no legal
responsibility to inform any entity except law enforcement of an
allegation of child abuse.”
This is worrisome at best – and despite the board resolution requiring
be informed – is still controlled by law enforcement. And there is
nothing quite so informative+comforting as an LAUSD form letter
informing you – minus specifics – that your child may have been abused.
The risk management folk are worried about potential civil liability –
and law enforcement about the security of their criminal investigation.
And the rights of children to be secure? – And of parents to be
informed? Never you mind about that!
Hopefully some Sacramento staffer will read this part of the audit to
their legislator with the proper level of concern in their voice.
THERE IS NO MENTION IN THE AUDIT REPORT of the specifics of the most
infamous cases of abuse at Miramonte and Telfair, the reasons why those
two particular schools may have been ill-treated by the abusers (or the
District) – or the theatrical removal+housing of the entire Miramonte
staff.
THE REST – AND THIS ISN’T ALL OF IT - IS JUST EMPTY CHAMBERS IN THE SMOKING GUN:
• The district failed to notify the commission of at least 144 cases
that were a year or more late when the district finally reported them—31
were more than three years late and 23 of these involved misconduct
against a student. Two of the 23 cases were more than four years late.
• Classified district employees who are dismissed, resign, or enter into
a settlement agreement during the course of a misconduct investigation
may be able to find employment with other school districts.
• Independent Charter Schools Are Not Required to Follow the District’s Policies and Procedures Regarding Child Abuse Reporting
• In one instance, we were unable to determine whether a district
employee appropriately called law enforcement after receiving an
allegation of child abuse. In fact, the documentation obtained from the
district indicated that the central office and local district were
unaware of the incident until a reporter inquired about its status two
weeks later.
• In the one remaining instance, the local district superintendent
waited 45 days before housing an employee. According to the employee’s
file, law enforcement had approved an administrative investigation. The
principal stated that he recommended the employee be housed, According
to the local district, it initially chose not to house the employee
because there was no law enforcement investigation, and the dispatched
officer did not believe that the incident rose to the level of a crime.
However, district policy states that in all instances, the safety of
students will be the primary criterion for any relocation decision. This
employee was subsequently arrested and convicted of multiple counts of
child molestation.
• Although it was able to explain some of the significant delays, the
district was at times unable to give reasonable responses for instances
when an investigation would stall for months at a time.
• In one investigation, we found that the principal took five months to
inform the district’s central office about the status of an
investigation after notifying the local district, and there was no
indication of any investigatory action occurring during those five
months.
• In one case we reviewed, the principal took nearly five months to
issue a conference memo. The district issued a suspension two months
later, but it took the superintendent another five months to request
that the district pursue settlement and dismissal options.
A 4LAKIDS READER WRITES: “As my school counseling professor told us to
never forget: ‘Schools are adult institutions run by adults for
adults’."
Thank you Bob. Sometimes we forget these things while tilting at the windmills.
¡Onward/Adelante! - smf
PUBLIC LETTER ACCOMPANYING STATE AUDITORS REPORT ON REPORTING CHILD ABUSE IN LAUSD
http://www.bsa.ca.gov/pdfs/reports/2012-103.pdf
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR
BUREAU OF STATE AUDITS
Elaine M. Howle
State Auditor
Doug Cordiner
Chief Deputy
555 Capitol Mall, Suite300
Sacramento,CA 95814
916.445.0255 • 916.327.0019 fax • www.auditor.ca.gov
November 29, 2012 Report 2012-103
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 (state auditor) presents this audit report concerning
whether the Los Angeles Unified School District (district) is properly
handling allegations of employee abuse against students.
This report concludes that the district often did not properly notify
the Commission on Teacher Credentialing (commission) when required to do
so, such as when an employee with a certificate to teach is dismissed
while an allegation of misconduct is pending. Our review of the
information the district provided to the commission found that the
district failed to report as required at least 144 cases—including cases
involving employee misconduct against students—submitted a year or more
late when the district finally did report them.
Of the 144 cases, 31 were more than three years late when they were
reported to the commission. As a result of the delays in reporting these
cases, the commission was not able to determine promptly whether it was
appropriate to revoke the teachers’ certificates and thus prevent the
individuals from working in other school districts. Further, we found
that there is no statewide mechanism to communicate to other school
districts when a classified employee at any given district, such as a
campus aide or food service worker, separates by dismissal, resignation,
or settlement during the course of an investigation involving
misconduct with students.
The district has made improvements to its policies and procedures
related to reporting, investigating, and tracking suspected child abuse
over time. However, although the district generally followed state law
and its own policies and procedures when reporting and investigating
suspected child abuse, we found that the district did not always act
promptly on some allegations during the investigation, nor did it always
discipline employees in a timely manner. During an investigation of
employee misconduct, the district is responsible for keeping the
employee away from the school site. The district’s policy for addressing
this responsibility is to house the employee—to relocate him or her
away from its school sites. During this time the district continues to
pay the employee’s salary. We noted that the district paid $3 million in
salaries to 20 employees housed the longest for allegations of
misconduct against students. Finally, the lengthy and expensive
dismissal process
required by state law contributes to the district’s settling with
employees rather than continuing with the dismissal process. However,
the district does not maintain a districtwide tracking mechanism for
settlements that includes the total amount paid out and descriptions of
the misconduct. Such information could help the district identify and
analyze patterns and trends associated with providing a
settlement.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ELAINE M. HOWLE, CPA
State Auditor
STUDENT SCORES MAY BE USED IN LAUSD TEACHER RATINGS
UNION LEADERS AND DISTRICT OFFICIALS AGREE TO MAKE TESTING DATA PART OF EVALUATIONS. BUT SOME HURDLES REMAIN
By Teresa Watanabe and Howard Blume, Los Angeles Times | http://lat.ms/Va5ySF
"THIS IS A COMPLEX AGREEMENT AND POSSIBLY THE MOST SOPHISTICATED
EVALUATION AGREEMENT THAT I HAVE SEEN. IT ASSURES THAT TEST SCORES WILL
NOT BE OVERUSED, WILL NOT BE ASSIGNED AN ARBITRARY AND INAPPROPRIATE
WEIGHT, WILL NOT BE THE SOLE OR PRIMARY DETERMINANT OF A TEACHER'S
EVALUATION." -Diane Ravitch
December 1, 2012 :: After months of tense negotiations, leaders of the
Los Angeles Unified School District and its teachers union have
tentatively agreed to use student test scores to evaluate instructors
for the first time, officials announced Friday.
Under the breakthrough agreement, the nation's second-largest school
district would join Chicago and a growing number of other cities in
using test scores as one measure of how much teachers help their
students progress academically in a year.
Alarm over low student performance, especially in impoverished and
minority communities, has prompted the Obama administration and others
to press school districts nationwide to craft better ways to identify
struggling teachers for improvement.
The Los Angeles pact proposes to do that using a unique mix of
individual and schoolwide testing data — including state standardized
test scores, high school exit exams and district assessments, along with
rates of attendance, graduation and suspensions.
But the tentative agreement leaves unanswered the most controversial
question: how much to count student test scores in measuring teacher
effectiveness. The school district and the union agreed only that the
test scores would not be "sole, primary or controlling factors" in a
teacher's final evaluation.
"It is crystal clear that what we're doing is historic and very
positive," said L.A. Supt. John Deasy, who has fought to use student
test scores in teacher performance reviews since taking the district's
helm nearly two years ago. "This will help develop the skills of the
teaching profession and hold us accountable for student achievement."
Members of United Teachers Los Angeles, however, still need to ratify
the agreement. Many teachers have long opposed using test scores in
their evaluations, saying test scores are unreliable measures of teacher
ability.
The union characterized the agreement as a "limited" response to a Dec. 4
court-ordered deadline to show that test scores are being used in
evaluations and said negotiations were continuing for future academic
years. The deadline was imposed by Los Angeles County Superior Court
Judge James C. Chalfant, who ruled this year that state law requires
L.A. Unified to use test scores in teacher performance reviews.
In a statement, the teachers union also emphasized that the agreement
rejected the use of the district's method of measuring student academic
progress for individual instructors. That measure, called Academic
Growth Over Time, uses a mathematical formula to estimate how much a
teacher helps students' performance, based on state test scores and
controlling for such outside factors as income and race. Under the
agreement, however, schoolwide scores using this method, also known as a
value-added system, will be used.
For individual teachers, the agreement proposes to use raw state
standardized test score data. Warren Fletcher, teachers union president,
said that data give teachers more useful information about student
performance on specific skills.
Critics of using test scores in teacher reviews praised Los Angeles'
proposed new system, saying it uses a wide array of data to determine a
teacher's effect on student learning.
Deasy said he will be developing guidelines for administrators on how to
use the mix of data in teacher reviews and has said in the past that
test scores should not count for more than 25% of the final rating.
"This is a complex agreement and possibly the most sophisticated
evaluation agreement that I have seen," said Diane Ravitch, an
educational historian and vocal critic of the use of test scores in
teacher evaluations. "It assures that test scores will not be overused,
will not be assigned an arbitrary and inappropriate weight, will not be
the sole or primary determinant of a teacher's evaluation."
Teacher Brent Smiley at Lawrence Middle School in Chatsworth said: "I
will vote yes. I have no doubt that my union leaders negotiated the best
they could, given the adverse set of circumstances they faced."
Labor-relations expert Charles Kerchner called the agreement "a shotgun wedding," but added, "I think it's unabashed good news."
He said it's notable that value-added measures and test scores have been accepted in some form by the teachers union.
"UTLA has moved beyond a strategy of just saying no to a strategy of
trying to craft a useful agreement," said Kerchner, a professor at
Claremont Graduate University.
The district is currently developing a new evaluation system that uses
Academic Growth Over Time — along with a more rigorous classroom
observation process, student and parent feedback and a teacher's
contributions to the school community. The new observations were tested
last year on a voluntary basis with about 450 teachers and 320
administrators; this year, every principal and one volunteer teacher at
each of the district's 1,200 schools are expected to be trained.
The teachers union has filed an unfair labor charge against the
district, arguing that the system is being unilaterally imposed without
required negotiations.
Some teachers who have participated in the new observation process say
it offers more specific guidance on how they can improve. Other
educators — teachers and administrators alike — complain that it is too
time-consuming.
The tentative agreement, acknowledging the extra time the new
evaluations would take, would extend the time between evaluations from
two to as long as five years for teachers with 10 or more years of
experience.
Bill Lucia of EdVoice, the Sacramento-based educational advocacy group
that brought the lawsuit, said he was "cautiously optimistic."
But he expressed dismay that the union did not reach agreement a few
weeks earlier, which he said would have given L.A. Unified a shot at a
$40-million federal grant. The district applied for the Race to the Top
grant without the required teacher union support and was eliminated from
the competition this week.
Negotiations over the tentative pact, however, nearly fell apart.
Earlier this week, the union pulled away from the deal on the table,
L.A. Unified officials said. And the district discussed holding a Monday
emergency school-board meeting to craft a formal response to the court
order in anticipation that no deal would be reached. The options
included adopting an evaluation system without the union's consent.
Some members of the Board of Education, who also will need to approve
the pact, praised the agreement for taking student growth and
achievement into account but gauging this growth through multiple
measures. Steve Zimmer said that, just as important, this milestone was
achieved through negotiation.
School board President Monica Garcia praised the tentative deal as
"absolutely, by all accounts, better than what we have today."
KEEPING CALIFORNIA'S KIDS HEALTHY: Budget cuts forced
the demise of the Healthy Families program, but children must have
access to care.
L.A. Times Editorial | http://lat.ms/VooEKL
•THE HEALTHY FAMILIES PROGRAM provides insurance to children in families
too poor to afford private coverage but not quite poor enough to
qualify for:
• MEDI-CAL, which is available to those whose earnings don't exceed the
federal poverty line ($19,000 for a family of three in 2012).
December 2, 2012 :: In a bid to cut the state's healthcare bills, the
Brown administration will begin shuttering the Healthy Families
insurance program for low-income children on Jan. 1. More than 850,000
kids will be shifted over the course of the year into HMOs that
participate in Medi-Cal, California's version of the federally
subsidized Medicaid program. It may be too late now for the Legislature
to rescue Healthy Families from its untimely and potentially disruptive
end, even though lawmakers are heading to Sacramento on Monday to begin a
special session devoted to healthcare issues. But state lawmakers and
federal Medicaid officials should do as much as they can to ensure that
these children's parents won't be left scrambling desperately to find a
doctor or a dentist when their kids need one.
Healthy Families provides insurance to children in families too poor to
afford private coverage but not quite poor enough to qualify for
Medi-Cal, which is available to those whose earnings don't exceed the
federal poverty line ($19,000 for a family of three in 2012). The
program receives more generous federal subsidies than Medi-Cal, yet it's
more expensive for the state because it offers doctors, dentists and
hospitals higher rates than Medi-Cal pays. Those higher payments lead
more providers to participate in Healthy Families, making it easier for
the children it covers to obtain care.
Despite the success of Healthy Families, Gov. Jerry Brown persuaded the
Legislature earlier this year to end it and cover its beneficiaries
through Medi-Cal's managed-care program instead. The goal was to save an
estimated $13 million in the first half of 2013 and potentially even
more in the future, narrowing the state's budget gap. The change also
promised two potential benefits for low-income families: Medi-Cal covers
some healthcare costs that Healthy Families doesn't, and its premiums
and co-pays are lower.
Many children's advocates in the state, however, say that the easier
access to doctors in Healthy Families trumps Medi-Cal's superior
coverage and lower out-of-pocket costs. In some rural areas, new
Medi-Cal patients may have to leave the county to find certain types of
providers. That's too much to ask of families who are barely scraping
by, particularly if their children have chronic diseases or mental
health issues. Imagine being a single mother with a full-time job, no
car and a 10-year-old daughter who needs dialysis, but the only provider
willing to treat her is 30 miles away.
With the 2010 federal healthcare law about to force tumultuous changes
in the industry, now is an especially bad time to eliminate Healthy
Families. In little more than a year, millions more low-income
Californians will become eligible for Medi-Cal if the state extends it
to those earning up to 133% of the poverty line, as provided by the new
law. That expansion would put even more strain on an overburdened
program. At the same time, new subsidies for private health insurance
will become available for low- and moderate-income families. Besides,
the cancellation of the program will not improve the state's finances
any time soon. Upset about the program's demise, Republicans blocked the
renewal of a tax on managed-care plans that had helped pay for it,
costing the state nearly $200 million annually.
Ideally, lawmakers would move swiftly to preserve Healthy Families and
the corresponding tax for at least one more year. That would allow
low-income children and their parents to move together into new
insurance coverage in 2014, whether it be through Medi-Cal or heavily
subsidized private plans. The prospects of such an 11th-hour rescue are
slim, however; the state has already sent notices to many Healthy
Families beneficiaries telling them that their coverage is changing Jan.
1.
If Healthy Families can't be saved, it's imperative that federal
officials withhold approval of the state's plan until the state shows
that the program's beneficiaries will continue to have the same access
to care as before. Although some Healthy Families participants are
covered by insurers that also offer Medi-Cal HMOs, many others will have
to be placed with new insurers. And just because an insurer offers a
Medi-Cal HMO, that doesn't mean its network of providers can handle an
influx of new patients.
The state plans to shift Healthy Families recipients into Medi-Cal in
four phases, starting in January with those who can move to Medi-Cal
HMOs run by the same insurers and served by the same networks of doctors
that serve them today. Soon after, though, the state will have to deal
with children whose current doctors, dentists or therapists don't
participate in Medi-Cal. Meanwhile, children newly eligible for coverage
will go straight into Medi-Cal HMOs, even in areas where access to care
is in doubt.
State officials say kids whose HMOs can't meet their needs will be
allowed to seek care from out-of-network providers. That's predicated on
the risky assumption, however, that these families will be able to find
any providers in their communities willing to treat patients at
Medi-Cal's low rates.
The federal Department of Health and Human Services and state lawmakers
shouldn't hesitate to slam the brakes on the transition if the state
cannot preserve kids' access to care. And as Senate President Pro Tem
Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) has suggested, the administration needs
a way to monitor the performance of Medi-Cal HMOs after they've started
adding former Healthy Families beneficiaries to see if problems emerge.
That monitoring capability should be in place in a county before
Healthy Families is terminated there.
The Brown administration seems determined to phase out Healthy Families
as rapidly as it can. Making sure low-income kids have access to the
healthcare they need, however, is more important than maximizing the
potential savings to state government. If the state must bring Healthy
Families to a premature end, lawmakers in Sacramento and regulators in
Washington should keep a close eye on the process to make sure no
children are pushed into a coverage abyss.
LETTER TO DR. JAIME AQUINO FROM SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
PRINCIPALS + A CONCERN ABOUT FAIRNESS IN RESTORING CUTS
From the Associated Administrators of Los Angeles
(AALA – “The Principals Union”) UPDATE | Week of December 3, 2012 | http://bit.ly/WCnM0p
29 November 2012 :: AALA thanks Gary Garcia, President of the Senior
High School Principals’ Organization, for sharing this letter.
______________________________
•• smf: 4LAKids is very averse to editing other’s material; writing is
wordsmithery, editing it is word butchery. That said, though every
paragraph, sentence, word and item of punctuation in the cited letter is
apropos and wonderful – I went on far too long in my essay and there
ain’t room for both in this issue of 4LAKids! The important thing is
that Dr. Aquino got the whole letter and will/should/better respond!
The entire letter is complete on AALA’s website and here: http://bit.ly/WCnM0p
With apologies, to the letterwriter and the Reader’s Digest - the Readers Digest version follows:
______________________________
Dear Dr. Aquino:
Thank you for taking time out of your previously set schedule to meet
with high school principals on Wednesday. The main topic of our
discussion will be the various District initiatives that involve
professional development.
• Teaching and Learning Framework
• English Language Learner Master Plan
• Common Core Standards
In general, the concerns that principals in middle, secondary span and
high schools from all parts of the District have shared with me apply to
all three sets of the aforementioned professional development modules:
•MODULES HAVE A BIAS TOWARD THE TYPE OF PD THAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FACULTIES, NOT SECONDARY.
• THE SCHOOL YEAR STARTED BEFORE THE MODULES WERE COMPLETED. Due dates
for when the modules should be delivered to teachers have changed
repeatedly this semester. This makes school-site administrators look
disorganized in the eyes of our staffs.
• THE CONCERNS ABOUT THE MODULES ARE EXACERBATED BY AN OVERALL LACK OF RESOURCES THAT HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO SCHOOL SITES.
• The fact that we do not have enough custodians, counselors, clerks,
teachers (class sizes in the 40s in many high schools), etc., makes full
implementation of the myriad district mandates almost impossible.
• With the haphazard way the modules were rolled out this semester, many principals are wary of what we may see in the spring.
STATEMENTS FROM HIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPALS :
►I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR JAIME'S RESPONSE TO THIS IDEA: We can do a few
things well or we can do many things poorly. We are not resourced to do
many things well. We would rather do a few things well than do many
things poorly. Currently, we are doing too many things poorly.
►MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS TIME. I understand the rationale for both the new
evaluation system and the multiple PD initiatives. If we had a more
expeditious system of entering data from our classroom visits, the new
system would be more do-able. Even if you are fast with the technology,
and I’m pretty good, the time it takes to categorize the script we took
from the visit makes the process very difficult to manage
Along the same lines, the PD Modules are simply too many to adequately cover in 7-14 PD days
►I, TOO, AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE SHORT TIMELINE TO FACILITATE ALL THESE
MODULES. If we are asking our teachers to use researched-based,
successful strategies to address quality and rigor and to "go deeper,"
with our students, we need to model these strategies during our faculty
PD while facilitating our teachers to raise awareness and understanding
of the modules and their implementation
►ONE QUESTION: ARE THERE EXPERIENCED HIGH SCHOOL APSCSS SERVING AS PART
OF THE DISTRICT-LEVEL DISCUSSION REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
MORE RECENT A-G DIPLOMA REQUIREMENTS ? As well as the various levels of
intervention for at-risk students? (for example for math)
►PROBLEMS WITH THE EL MASTER PLAN BOOK: The writers of the book provide
little differentiation for their widely varied audience. Instructions
for some of the suggested strategies are directed toward all teachers,
but many are unrealistic for high school subject matter teachers.
►PROBLEM WITH COMMON CORE STANDARDS INITIATIVE: Using the term
“instructional shifts” when referring to (a) teaching complex texts and
(b) providing reading and writing grounded in evidence from the text,
suggests that competent high school English teachers have not been doing
that all along. That is an insult to high school teachers of English.
AALA NOTE: Dr. Aquino verbally responded to these questions at the
November 28 SHSPO meeting. We have asked him to provide a written
response which will be published in the next issue of Update, if it is
available. The Senior High School Principals’ Organization also sent a
letter regarding facilities to Roger Finstad, Maintenance and Operations
Director, which will be published next week.
►A CONCERN FROM A UNIT J MEMBER
______________________________
••smf: Unit J are Classified Managers – also represented by UTLA. The
argument beloe applies to many LAUSD staff – who were moved from A Basis
to other bases – in otherwords from full annual employment to reduced
employment on a reduced calendar – a cut in days worked IS a cut in pay!
Many other employes (Library Aides/Elementary Librarians come to mind
– though they are not unique) have been moved from full time to part
time status – cutting their pay AND removing their benefits. If Prop 30
is returning money to the District it should be used to restore employees (who have made the sacrifice) to their previous status BEFORE
we start spending the money on something or someone else. And again –
this isn’t about employment – it is about services to students and
support of the classroom.
. ______________________________
AALA THANKS CLAIRE EALY, SENIOR TECHNICAL PROJECT MANAGER, ITD, FOR RAISING THIS ISSUE.
Regarding the article: “RESTORATION OF THE FULL SCHOOL YEAR AND FURLOUGH
DAYS - NOW WHAT?” I absolutely agree with your comments about funding,
creative thinking and making every effort to help schools. But again,
please think about the classified staff members who have also been
negatively impacted by the budget cuts. Specifically, I am referring to
basis changes.
Many staff were changed from A Basis and I have not heard any discussion about bringing that back.
Once a cut has been made, it’s easy to forget the staff who were
impacted, unless they speak up or have their union speak up for them.
ITD used project managers as sacrificial lambs when the budget got tight
a couple of years ago. Now we’re in our third year of B Basis (on top
of all the furloughs during that time). THESE MANAGERS SUPERVISE STAFF
WHO ARE A BASIS AS WELL AS HIGHLY PAID FULL-TIME CONTRACTORS. Some, but
not all, staff are able to get Z time but many managers scrutinize Z
time requests and make the staff go find another unit to fund it. That
is demeaning and demoralizing.
CAN YOU HELP RESTORE A BASIS FOR CLASSIFIED STAFF? All AALA members may
not be aware, but Unit J includes ITD project managers who work on
projects that are requested and paid for by other divisions in the
District. Some divisions, or large projects, have sufficient funding to
pay for Z time; however, many project managers work on multiple smaller
projects for various units that may not have any, or very little,
funding. In addition, most project managers are responsible for
employees who are on A Basis and therefore, working without supervision a
portion of the year. Needless to say, the reduction to B Basis did not
change the workload; project managers, like school administrators, are
expected to accomplish the same amount of work in less time.
AALA remains committed to improving the working conditions of its
members and, therefore, urges the Superintendent and Board, as they
develop budget priorities, to return all of our members, classified and
certificated, to their previous bases.
HIGHLIGHTS, LOWLIGHTS & THE NEWS THAT DOESN'T
FIT: The Rest (but not necessarily the best) of the Stories from Other
Sources
AT BROOKLYN FREE SCHOOL, A MOVEMENT BORN WITH LIBERTY
AND NO TESTING FOR ALL: Lucas Kavner / huffington post | ... http://bit.ly/11vWkFX
Expand
Report: SCHOOL TESTING IN U.S. COSTS $1.7 BILLION; BUT THAT MAY NO BE ENOUGH: Joy resmovits / huffington post |... http://bit.ly/11vS3lW
Public Education in the other LA: LOUISIANA VOUCHER PROGRAM RULED UNCONSTITUTIONAL: By Stephanie Simon/Reuters /... http://bit.ly/11vI8Nh
NO MORE EXCUSES FOR CALIFORNIA: Themes in the News A weekly commentary written by UCLA IDEA on the important iss... http://bit.ly/11dVJtl
Attorney: “CRIMINAL CULPABILITY’ NEEDED TO FIX LAUSD ABUSE SCANDAL | CTC: FAILURE TO REPORT CONSTITUTES UNPROFES... http://bit.ly/XaoTtc
Tentative Agreement: LAUSD-UTLA TEACHER EVALUATION PROCEDURES: from http://UTLA.NET TENTATIVE AGREEMENT: LA... http://bit.ly/11dHgxq
STUDENT SCORES MAY BE USED IN LAUSD TEACHER RATINGS: Union leaders and District officials agree to make testing ... http://bit.ly/11dEWql
LETTER TO DR. JAIME AQUINO FROM SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPALS + A CONCERN ABOUT FAIRNESS IN RESTORING CUTS: From... http://bit.ly/Yg6flk
Letters: ON THE OTHER HAND ON DEASY: letters to the Editor of the LA Times | http://lat.ms/YxFHus November 30, ... http://bit.ly/11q06Rj
View summary
30 Nov Scott Folsom Scott Folsom @4LAKids
A+ SCHOOLS INFUSE ARTS AND OTHER ‘ESSENTIALS’: By Erik W. Robelen, Education Week | http://bit.ly/YxC1ck J... http://bit.ly/119VlMq
AUDIT FINDS FAILURES, DELAYS IN LAUSD TEACHER MISCONDUCT PROCESS + Deasy’s Response + District Fact Sheet + more... http://bit.ly/119Re2Z
State Auditor: LAUSD SLOW TO REPORT ON TEACHER MISCONDUCT: Audit finds the school district failed to promptly in... http://bit.ly/1178B4l
CALIFORNIA STATE AUDIT FAULTS L.A. UNIFIED’S ABUSE REPORTING + Audit Report: By CHRISTINA HOAG Associated Press,... http://bit.ly/11lbUnN
WHAT HAPPENED TO PUBLIC EDUCATION ON ELECTION NIGHT?: By Joanne Barkan – Dissent Magazine | http://bit.ly/Uei2tP ... http://bit.ly/TtoIDg
HOW CHARTER SCHOOLS FLEECE TAXPAYERS: Arizona Charter School Officials Are Enriching Themselves With Public Fund... http://bit.ly/114TMiX
LURKING IN THE BUSHES: Is the “Florida Education Miracle just another “Texas Education Miracle”?: …and who do yo... http://bit.ly/114B62B
Charter organization apologia+fugue in C minus: THE OFFICIAL PRESS RELEASE: from NACSA | http://bit.ly/UusHCY s... http://bit.ly/YaIxa3
National Charter Group: 1-in-5 CHARTER SCHOOLS NOT DOING WELL ENOUGH TO STAY OPEN + USAToday + smf’s 2¢: A group... http://bit.ly/TsNjbd
Letters: NOT SO FAST ON CHARTER SCHOOLS!: letters to the editor of the LA Times | http://lat.ms/QsFHc0 Re "Give... http://bit.ly/11jE1DT
View summary
29 Nov Scott Folsom Scott Folsom @4LAKids
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL DISTRICTS FACE HUGE DEBT ON RISKY BONDS: About 200 districts have borrowed billions of dollars... http://bit.ly/Tss4X8
Expand
28 Nov Scott Folsom Scott Folsom @4LAKids
GREAT UNCERTAINTY OVER DIRECTION OF STATE STANDARDIZED TESTS: “State policymakers are ready to deemphasize the r... http://bit.ly/V2Tipi
Pushing K-12 off the Fiscal Cliff: CUT DEEP - HOW THE SEQUESTER WILL IMPACT OUR NATION'S SCHOOLS: from the Ameri... http://bit.ly/Y86Ghm
DOE v. DEASY/TEACHER TALKS: What happens if they can’t agree?: by Hillel Aron, L.A. School Report | http://bit.l... http://bit.ly/11gj9gR
SCHOOL FUNDING CHANGES DEBATED AT EDUCATORS MEETING: Adolfo Guzman-Lopez | Pass / Fail | 89.3 KPCC | http://bi... http://bit.ly/10ZZgLU
LAUSD PUTTING ON A SHOW – A TALENT SHOW …to showcase employee-entertainers and raise money for after-school prog... http://bit.ly/Y7SN2M
FOSTER YOUTH IN THE SEX TRADE: Most L.A. County youths held for prostitution come from foster care: The Board of... http://bit.ly/10ZSMwy
U*P*D*A*T*E*D: TEACHER JAILS FILL AS THE GHOSTS OF MIRAMONTE + TELFAIR (+ PENN STATE) HAUNT LAUSD [with UTLA response] http://bit.ly/TuaA03
CHARTER SCHOOL PROPONENTS TO ANNOUNCE MAJOR FOCUS ON SHUTTING DOWN FAILING SCHOOLS: “We didn't start this moveme... http://bit.ly/V21xSi
A ROAD MAP FOR L.A. UNIFIED …when maybe GPS is needed?: A six-year study provides a wealth of information on how... http://bit.ly/11cKccN
A challenge for HIV/Health Ed in our schools: CDC + KAISER FOUNDATION REPORTS TROUBLING RISE IN HIV INFECTIONS A... http://bit.ly/119tyej
The New Yorker Profile: PUBLIC DEFENDER – DIANE RAVITCH TAKES ON A MOVEMENT …and The New Yorker: Ravitch: “The h... http://bit.ly/Tk0tXO
GREEN DOT MAKES THE RACE TO THE TOP CUT, DROPS FOUNDER STEVE BARR; LAUSD – never in the race …is out of the run... http://bit.ly/115Gq4U
I LOVE LA(USD): Yesterday AM Dr. Deasy was a Saint http://lat.ms/10YqUrw …today he’s a Big Bully. http://bit.ly/SnT6Sd
LAUSD: CRENSHAW HIGH’S BIG BULLY: Janet Denise Kelly CityWatch Vol 10 Issue 95 | http://bit.ly/SnT6Sd 27 Nov 20... http://bit.ly/UU0jIS
LAUSD NOT A RACE TO THE TOP FINALIST, John Deasy Reacts: 'We're Not A Finalist? …I'm Shocked!': Anna Almendrala ... http://bit.ly/TgSzP2
¿Urgently incremental?: SUPT. DEASY, HEAD OF THE CLASS: John Deasy approaches his mission at LAUSD with a strong... http://bit.ly/WTMRc6
FOR TWO L.A. SCHOOLS, SHARING A CAMPUS IS STARTING TO CHAFE + smf’s 2¢: Logan Elementary in Echo Park hosts Gabr... http://bit.ly/WTMQoF
Deep-fried pretzel logic: SCHOOL’S NO-RUNNING POLICY IS MAKING MOM GAIN WEIGHT: To get their children healthier,... http://bit.ly/WTMQoC
EVENTS: Coming up next week...
*Dates and times subject to change. ________________________________________
• SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION BOND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE:
http://www.laschools.org/bond/
Phone: 213-241-5183
____________________________________________________
• LAUSD FACILITIES COMMUNITY OUTREACH CALENDAR:
http://www.laschools.org/happenings/
Phone: 213-241.8700
What can YOU do?
• E-mail, call or write your school board member:
Tamar.Galatzan@lausd.net • 213-241-6386
Monica.Garcia@lausd.net • 213-241-6180
Bennett.Kayser@lausd.net • 213-241-5555
Marguerite.LaMotte@lausd.net • 213-241-6382
Nury.Martinez@lausd.net • 213-241-6388
Richard.Vladovic@lausd.net • 213-241-6385
Steve.Zimmer@lausd.net • 213-241-6387
...or your city councilperson, mayor, the governor, member of congress,
senator - or the president. Tell them what you really think! • Find
your state legislator based on your home address. Just go to: http://bit.ly/dqFdq2 • There are 26 mayors and five county supervisors representing jurisdictions within LAUSD, the mayor of LA can be reached at mayor@lacity.org • 213.978.0600
• Call or e-mail Governor Brown: 213-897-0322 e-mail: http://www.govmail.ca.gov/
• Open the dialogue. Write a letter to the editor. Circulate these
thoughts. Talk to the principal and teachers at your local school.
• Speak with your friends, neighbors and coworkers. Stay on top of education issues. Don't take my word for it!
• Get involved at your neighborhood school. Join your PTA. Serve on a School Site Council. Be there for a child.
• If you are eligible to become a citizen, BECOME ONE.
• If you a a citizen, REGISTER TO VOTE.
• If you are registered, VOTE LIKE THE FUTURE DEPENDS ON IT. THEY DO!.
|
