In This Issue:
 |
| • |
The new Common Core test results: DON’T PLAY THE BLAME GAME! |
|
| • |
WHY
THE WASHINGTON STATE SUPREME COURT RULING MATTERS: The origins of a
surprisingly simple decision that could have major implications |
|
| • |
LAUSD NEARING $6 MILLION SETTLEMENT WITH APPLE, PEARSON OVER INSTRUCTIONAL CONTENT ON iPADS |
|
| • |
Editorial: A CHARTER SCHOOL EXPANSION COULD BE GREAT FOR L.A. |
|
| • |
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 between the corporate demise of LA Times publisher
Austin Beutner, the new Common Core Test Scores and the International
Migrant Crisis – there must be a story in there somewhere! Add to that
Washington State Supreme Court’s outlawing charter schools and the
renewed brouhaha over “Dr.” John’s expense account and you have enough
stories to make an issue! (…or issues to make a story.)
But first a correction:
TAKE A DAY OFF! TAKE 2! TAKE 3 or 4! The representation in last week’s
4LAKids that the annual rescheduling of the Admission Day Holiday was
somehow the work of the LAUSD-UTLA contract was incorrect; it is
apparently the work of the LAUSD-clerical staff contract. Which leaves
us with SEIU, CSEA and the Teamsters as likely suspects. 4LAKids
apologizes after-the-fact for getting the first bit wrong …and
apologizes in advance for not clarifying which contract requires the
bogus holiday observance.
This coming Monday Sept 14th and next Wednesday Sept 23 are “Unassigned
Days” (no classes in session) that align with the Jewish High Holy Days
of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. To be clear: 4LAKids has no problem
with observing the Jewish New Year (acknowledging a Higher Authority
than the union contract and the ed code!) But Admission Day? Really?
4LAKids IS WARY OF WANDERING TOO FAR into the LA Times/Austin Beutner affair. [LA TIMES PUBLISHER+CEO TO BE REPLACED http://bit.ly/1KZuAlY]
Everything that happens in the world is not the direct result of ®eform
Agenda Public Education Policy, Big Business Corporate Shenanigans and
the undue influence of Eli Broad & Company. But sometimes it seems
that way. The protests from the likes of former Mayor Tony over
Beutner’s fall-from-power echoes the same messages over John Deasy’s
denouement. | http://bit.ly/1FEAgvL
THE TIMES PUBLISHED AN EXCELLENT EDITORIAL about how we shouldn’t pay
all that much attention to the new Common Core test scores [WHAT WILL
COMMON CORE TEST RESULTS SHOW? Comparing old+new results like comparing
apples+porcupines | http://bit.ly/1OvoWaf]
and then proceeded to slice+dice them every way possible.[ NEW
CALIFORNIA TESTS PRESENT SOBERING PICTURE OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT http://bit.ly/1J1oJXw]
The news was not good, we had been warned that it wouldn’t be – it’s a
different test testing different skills in a different way using
different metrics. We don’t erase the Achievement Gap by changing the
test and/or distributing iPads and/or going wall-to-wall charter
schools.
But the sky isn’t falling either. [This Sunday’s Times’ editorial
relapse into Dr. Deasyland and Babbiting boosterish paean to Eli Broad
notwithstanding: A CHARTER SCHOOL EXPANSION COULD BE GREAT FOR L.A.]
AND THE REFUGEE/MIGRANT CRISIS CONTINUES – with the Hungarian government
mobilizing troops to keep the displaced persons out while the German
government mobilizes troops to welcome them in. All along the way there
are stories of Good Samaritans doing their small part, one good deed at a
time. Meanwhile the wars rage on and the borders overflow and the
rhetoric becomes more shrill and the razor wire is stretched tighter
…and children are the victims.
¡Onward/Adelante/L'shanah tovah! - smf
The new Common Core test results: DON’T PLAY THE BLAME GAME!
“SBAC SCORES SHOULD NOT BE PUBLISHED IN THE UPCOMING SCHOOL REPORT
CARDS. PUBLISHING THE SCHOOL’S SCORES IN THE REPORT CARDS WILL MAKE THE
SCORES EVALUATIVE BY THE VERY NATURE OF DOING SO AND WILL MISINFORM
PARENTS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS.”
From the Associated Administrators of Los Angeles Weekly Update for the Week of September 14, 2015 | bit.ly/1UKiYUV
10 Sept 2015 :: The California Department of Education released the
first year’s results of the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium
(SBAC) tests in English language arts/literacy and math on September 9,
2015. AALA understands that comparing SBAC scores to previous state
assessments is like comparing the proverbial apples to oranges.
Moreover, it appears students did not fare well overall. This may be
attributed to the newness of the test, the increased level of
technology, the delayed arrival of the technology to many schools, the
challenges of bandwidth infrastructure at many schools and because the
professional development provided thus far lags behind the teaching and
learning needed to parallel it with the California’s Common Core-aligned
tests. Most importantly, the scores are baseline, not for stakes,
nonevaluative and are meant to be used for the purpose of strengthening
pedagogy.
To access the scores, please follow this link: CAASPP Results.
AALA is concerned that, in the public’s eye, the scores have quickly
become evaluative for administrators and teachers. Teachers make a fair
point when they tell principals that if the results are indeed intended
to improve practice and alignment, why publish them? Therefore, context
is of great importance in this matter to maintain a keen perspective and
to provide administrators the appropriate, genuine and required levels
of supports.
There has been a significant influx of new principals since the
transition to and implementation of the Common Core State Standards
began in earnest some three years ago. Since beginning their assignment,
these principals have served TWO general superintendents, probably TWO
local District Superintendents, TWO Deputy Superintendents of
Instruction and more-than-likely, THREE Instructional Directors, THREE
ELA and THREE math coordinators from the Educational Service Centers now
known as Local Districts. In the process, freezes were imposed, and
then lifted, no substitutes were allowed for professional development
purposes on Mondays and Fridays, conference approvals required myriad
approvals and scrutiny and the operational demands kept coming!
Thus, situational awareness, empathy and understanding are needed to
ensure administrators are receiving the necessary supports to empower
and facilitate the process of being the instructional leaders the
District expects them to be. Herewith are some questions from AALA for
the District’s Leadership:
● How is the District going to streamline the duties and
responsibilities of administrators to optimize instructional leadership?
● How soon will District Leadership realize that additional assistant
principals are a mandatory part of the equation to improve student
achievement?
● How will the professional development provided by the District and the
Local Districts be differentiated to meet the needs of English
learners, standard English learners, students with disabilities, gifted
and talented students?
● How is the District stabilizing leadership at every level of the
organization to enhance a coherent, unified and articulated professional
development plan?
● How are the District and the Local Districts differentiating
professional development to meet the needs of the constituents served by
the Local District?
● How is the District organizing for effort and allocating the required
professional development funds to ensure Districtwide alignment with the
California Common Core curriculum and the tests?
It is predictable that scores will rise as teachers and administrators
become more familiar with the Common Core standards, and students become
familiar with the more complex questions on the examinations. For
example, in 2003, when the California Standards Tests were introduced,
30% of 3rd graders and 40% of 5th graders scored proficient and above in
English/Language Arts. Ten years later, 45% percent of 3rd graders and
60% percent of 5th graders scored at a proficient level. Some of this
improvement can be attributed to familiarity with testing structures and
procedures.
It is AALA’s position that SBAC scores should NOT be published in the
upcoming school report cards. Publishing the school’s scores in the
report cards will make the scores evaluative by the very nature of doing
so and will misinform parents and community members. There is no doubt
transparency and accessibility to the public is important. Therefore,
the school report card can link the public to the website repository
with a CLEAR disclaimer that the scores are nonevaluative.
WHY THE WASHINGTON STATE SUPREME COURT RULING
MATTERS: The origins of a surprisingly simple decision that could have
major implications
By Martha Carey from edushyster2012 | http://bit.ly/1FyDv7L
September 9, 2015 :: Something unusual happened in Washington state
late last week. Charter schools came out on the losing end of a lawsuit.
In fact, charter schools, as they are currently defined, funded and
organized, were actually ruled unconstitutional by that state’s Supreme
Court. And the basis of that decision was surprisingly simple. The
charter school law that narrowly passed Washington in 2012 was found to
be in violation of the state’s constitution precisely because charter
schools have private boards.
UNCOMMON SCHOOLS ≠ COMMON SCHOOLS
The constitution in that state clearly defines public schools as schools
that operate via taxpayer funds, and which are *under the control of
the qualified voters of the school district.*The Supreme Court just
ruled that *because charter schools [under the new charter law] are run
by an appointed board of nonprofit organization and thus are not subject
to local voter control, they cannot qualify* as public schools as
defined in Washington’s constitution. Which means funding them violates
the law – as noted in the ruling: *money that is dedicated to common
schools is unconstitutionally diverted to charter schools.*
What happens next will be pretty fascinating. Several charter
organizations and charter operators are calling for a special session of
the state legislature to *fix* this pesky problem. Others, including
the Washington State Education Association, are expressing vindication
and are urging legislators to address the poor state of public school
funding once and for all.
Each state’s charter school laws are distinct, and some are far vaguer
than others. In Pennsylvania, where I live, the charter school law put
into effect in 1997 allows for charter schools to be run as entirely
independent entities within a school district, and allows for those
charter schools to receive public funds from the state in order to
operate.
SCHOOLS-AS-FRANCHISES
The Pennsylvania model of loose policy regulation of charter schools and
essentially no oversight by the electorate is in alignment with the
language of minnesota-welcome-e1332613731772the earliest charter school
law, passed in Minnesota in 1991. The premise there was that public
school districts were restricting choice by their stranglehold on
schools-as-franchises in the education *market.* And the 1991 law
promoted the notion that groups of parents, businesses, cultural
organizations, etc. could get together and start schools that would give
parents and students more education options, and the state and local
districts would, correspondingly, divest themselves of the core
responsibilities (and rules and regulations) for these schools,
essentially allowing the *franchise* to organize and govern itself.
I first worked with several charters schools in St. Paul in 1996; in the
five years between the charter school law passing and then, not only
did a cluster of pretty random, curricular-specific charters (arts,
music, science) spring up around the Twin Cities, but several quickly
developed negative public reputations, mostly due to poor fiscal
management.
Each state’s approach to charter laws is distinct, but this case
seems to make a clear and compelling case about an idea that should be
unifying: taxes to fund schools come from taxpayers who elect
representatives at the state, local, and district levels who are our
proxies in providing oversight and regulation over where those funds go.
A UNIFYING IDEA
The case in Washington should give both charter proponents and
legislators pause, and hopefully will add fuel to cases now working
their way up the legal numbers 2pipeline. Each state’s approach to
charter laws is distinct, but this case seems to make a clear and
compelling case about an idea that should be unifying: taxes to fund
schools come from taxpayers who elect representatives at the state,
local, and district levels who are our proxies in providing oversight
and regulation over where those funds go. If the population of taxpayers
is not content with that process, they can change the legislators, the
funding structure, the tax structure, or all of the above, and this will
directly and immediately impact schools.
But charter schools are actually exempt from this most democratic of
processes, which is amazing when one considers that education is
actually a property right (meaning students are both required to have an
education and also cannot be denied an education without due process).
In most states, charters can put anyone they want to on their boards,
can raise funds from anyone they want to, can be housed wherever they
want to, can reject students whenever they want to, and can even opt out
of giving accurate reporting on the most basic of items – including how
many students they actually have – should they choose to. And the
taxpayers whose money is being funneled to these charters do not have a
say, an option, or a choice once these independently operated entities
get up and running. The only hope is that there is some appointed or
elected body that periodically reviews and, if they are found to be
engaging in fraud, closes down charter schools. And then the students in
those schools, of course, re-enter what remains of the public school
system.
But what the case in Washington underscores most is the elemental
choice made by charter proponents all those years ago, as they crafted
the Minnesota legislation, variations of which are now on the books in
42 states.
AND AN ELEMENTAL CHOICE
But what the case in Washington underscores most is the elemental choice
made by charter proponents all those years ago, as they crafted the
Minnesota legislation, variations of which are now on the books in 42
states. The choice was: do we work together as a community to best
provide the state-mandated education of all our citizens and do so in a
way that continues to be overseen by the electorate, which may mean
re-allocating resources and (gasp) raising taxes, or do we just let
private groups of folks do their own thing, using our taxes, in the name
of education?
●Martha Hope Carey lives in the Philadelphia area and recently completed
her PhD in Urban Education at Temple University. Her dissertation
research on urban charter teachers can be found at careythinking.org.
LAUSD NEARING $6 MILLION SETTLEMENT WITH APPLE,
PEARSON OVER INSTRUCTIONAL CONTENT ON iPADS
Posted on LA School Report by Mike Szymanski | http://bit.ly/1Y0qZJK
September 11, 2015 3:32 pm :: LA Unified Superintendent Ramon Cortines
said yesterday the district is close to finalizing a $6 million-plus
settlement deal with Apple and Pearson over the botched iPad program.
In a statement this afternoon, the district confirmed that it was
engaged in “cooperative discussions with our vendors” to resolve
concerns about the companies’ contribution to the district’s
Instructional Technology Initiative.
“Given the cooperative nature of these discussions, we anticipate there
will be a settlement proposal for the LAUSD Board of Education to
consider in the near future. the statement said.”
Even before sharing information about the pending deal with the school
board, which must approve any final deal, Cortines revealed details of
the settlement late yesterday, while attending a meeting of the
district’s new technology task force.
“It’s not what I want,” Cortines told the task force. “It will be $6
million-plus, and I want to pour all of that back into technology.”
Cortines launched the new school year’s meetings for the ITI Task Force
that will decide how to mix computer technology into the classroom
instruction. He said he plans to take the money from the settlement and
put a small amount aside for technology repair.
He also said he would propose that some of the money would be “set aside
for grants for schools that write exciting grants.” He emphasized that
he wanted to help the school with the most needs but also be fair
throughout all six of the Local Districts.
“I don’t want to penalize the schools that begged, borrowed and sold
cupcakes to bring technology to their schools,” he told the task force.
Cortines explained he would like to see a $1-to-$1 matching program for
some schools with innovative technology plans. And, if there are schools
that will use technology from elementary to middle school to high
school, he would like to see a $2-to-$1 match from the district using
the settlement money.
Previously, the district demanded a refund from Apple for iPads loaded
with Pearson software as part of the failed $1.3 billion program to get
an iPad to every LA Unified student.
The district’s chief legal advisor, David Holmquist, noted that Apple
and Pearson had failed to deliver on the promise of “a state-of-the-art
technological solution for [the district’s Instructional Technology
Initiative] implementation” and noted that the district is “extremely
dissatisfied.”
The district had asked for a multi-million dollar refund for the failed
plan that led to the resignation of previous Superintendent John Deasy.
____________________
►LAUSD IN TALKS WITH APPLE, PEARSON TO SETTLE SOFTWARE DISPUTE
by KPCC Staff | http://bit.ly/1gjTJuM
September 11, 2015 :: The Los Angeles Unified School District is
negotiating a settlement that could end its dispute with Apple Inc. and
Pearson Education over faulty software in iPads purchased from the
computer giant.
The district told Apple in April that it would not spend another dollar
on the Pearson software installed on its iPads and demanded a
multimillion-dollar refund.
Teachers have complained about numerous problems with the Pearson
software, including missing math problems and material that contained
errors.
David Holmquist, LAUSD general counsel, said in a letter to Apple that
it had promised a state-of-the-art solution for the district's
Instructional Technology Initiative, the name for the iPad program. But
Holmquist said the Apple and Pearson "have yet to deliver it."
Initially, the tablets were to go into the hands of each student in the
district, but after problems with its rollout and mounting costs, the
initiative was scaled back.
A Pearson spokesman told KPCC in September 2014 that there were
important enhancements to add to the software “as there always will be”
and that “no digital product should ever be considered complete."
LAUSD issued a statement Friday saying that the district is in
“cooperative discussions with our vendors about resolving past concerns
around the Pearson content.”
“Given the cooperative nature of these discussions, we anticipate there
will be a proposal for the LAUSD Board of Education to consider in [the]
near future,” the district stated.
The LA School Report first reported the settlement talks Friday.
●●smf’s 2¢: Not to make too much of the obvious, but the Apple-Pearson
contract was paid out of school construction bond funds – and any
settlement in the deal should be returned to that source. And there is
the outstanding question being investigated by various law enforcement
entities, including the FBI, as to whether the Apple-Pearson procurement
was legal.
Editorial: A CHARTER SCHOOL EXPANSION COULD BE GREAT FOR L.A.
By The L.A. Times Editorial Board | http://lat.ms/1F7nPNZ
13 Sept 2015 :: Slightly more than a fifth of all students in the Los
Angeles Unified School District are currently enrolled in charter
schools. That number would rise to nearly half of the district's
students if the early ambitions of a group of charter organizations and
their benefactors come to fruition.
The rapid ramp-up, if successful, would bring the number of students in
Los Angeles charter schools to nearly 300,000, more than twice as many
as anywhere else in the country. And if the charter schools of L.A.'s
future are like the ones of its past, this could be a great thing.
Studies by Stanford University have found that although charter schools
generally have a mixed record, those in Los Angeles have brought about
significantly better academic outcomes for students than traditional
district schools. The district's largest and best-known charter school
organizations — Green Dot Public Schools, Alliance College-Ready Public
Schools and so forth — have dedicated themselves to bringing
higher-quality education to low-income minority students who previously
had no alternatives to their low-performing district schools. Those
respected groups are reportedly involved in the expansion talks, as is
the Broad Foundation, whose philanthropist founder, Eli Broad, has long
donated to charter schools.
Charter schools are publicly funded but independently operated, and are
free from many of the regulations that govern district schools. They're
also free of sometimes stultifying union rules. The large charter
presence in L.A. speaks volumes about the high levels of dissatisfaction
with many of the district's regular public schools. Charter schools
also have put significant competitive pressure on traditional schools,
many of which have improved as a result, especially at the elementary
school level.
Now, charter school organizations and their supporters seem ready to bet
that within eight years, they can double their enrollment. It has taken
two decades to build enrollment to the current level, but charter
advocates say there is pent-up demand among families who believe their
traditional public schools are improving too slowly or not at all.
Waiting lists for charter schools in L.A. already exceed 40,000
applicants.
Not all charter schools are great schools, and if there is to be a
massive expansion, it will be important to make sure that those that do
not do a good job are fixed or closed. -
Of course, not all charter schools are great schools, and if there is to
be a massive expansion, it will be important to make sure that those
that do not do a good job are fixed or closed. Another issue is whether
the charter operators — even the very good ones — can attract and retain
enough high-quality teachers and administrators. It has never been done
at this scale or in this time frame, and it would have to happen in the
midst of a nationwide teacher shortage. And teacher turnover at charter
schools is higher than at traditional public schools. That doesn't mean
it can't be done, but it should be scrutinized along the way. The
boldness of the plan should be applauded — poorly educated students
can't wait forever for help — but charter leaders should move carefully
if they are to be successful.
And there will undoubtedly be pushback from within the district. Some
will come from the teachers union — United Teachers Los Angeles — which
reviles charter schools and is dedicated to protecting its members' jobs
at regular district schools. And some will come from L.A. Unified
officials, who have long complained that the district loses state money
when students decamp for charter schools, while charter operators
contend that the district is simply unwilling to restructure itself to
be more efficient.
One overriding principle should guide the school board as it considers
new charter applications, and it has nothing to do with teacher jobs or
the ramifications for the district's budget. It should be this: Will the
charter applicant run a good school? Will it provide an excellent
education for L.A.'s students? The needs of students, not those of the
institution, are what matter.
The school district shouldn't seek to rein in charter growth, but it and
the state should be doing a better job of overseeing such schools.
There have been numerous reports that charter schools, in an effort to
improve their test scores, have prodded their lowest-performing students
to leave and return to traditional public schools. This never has been
proved, but then again, no one has ever bothered trying to find out. The
concerns have been worrisome enough, though, that new school board
member Ref Rodriguez — a charter supporter and co-founder of a group of
charter schools — wants the issue thoroughly investigated.
There also have been scattered cases of charter schools ensuring that
they enroll only the most motivated and successful students by setting
high bars for interested families, such as parent-volunteering
requirements and long application essays. Efforts to cherry-pick
students are unacceptable; charter schools are supposed to accept all
comers, just as regular public schools do. (If too many apply, charter
schools are supposed to use a lottery.) When they have been caught
breaking or bending the rules, it has generally been by the media and
student advocacy groups, not by the agencies responsible for approving
and checking up on charter schools. The only serious official scrutiny
that charter operators typically get is when they are issued the right
to operate, and five years later when they apply for renewal. It would
seem a more thoughtful approach could be developed.
A new era of charter schools is at hand, one in which they seek to be a
bigger, more established player in the education arena rather than
simply a model of how public schools might improve. But California law
and policy need to be brought out of the 20th century. The state needs
well-enforced rules requiring charters to keep their doors open to all
students. Poor academic performance cannot be grounds for keeping a
child from enrolling, or for telling him or her to leave. By all means,
bring on more charter schools, as long as they are built on the
principles of academic excellence and equal access for all.
HIGHLIGHTS, LOWLIGHTS & THE NEWS THAT DOESN'T
FIT: The Rest (but not necessarily the best) of the Stories from Other
Sources
The new Common Core test results: DON’T PLAY THE BLAME GAME!
http://bit.ly/1UFNqVB
The new Common Core test results: NEW CALIFORNIA TESTS PRESENT SOBERING PICTURE OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
http://bit.ly/1J1oJXw
LA COUNTY OFFICE OF ED+HEALTH DEPT ISSUES EMERGENCY HEAT ALERT IN EFFECT THRU FRIDAY 9/11
Let's be careful out there!
http://bit.ly/1K0myax
Editorial: LAUSD WON A LAWSUIT — but lost the moral high ground
http://bit.ly/1O2iYk0
2 MORE ON THE WASHINGTON STATE SUPREME COURT DECISION ON CHARTER SCHOOLS
http://bit.ly/1FyDv7L
DIANE RAVITCH+GERONIMO+F. SCOTT FITZGERALD’S THOUGHTS ON DEASY’S EXPENSE ACCOUNT
http://bit.ly/1OAuqR4
4LAKids - some of the news that doesn't fit: ¡OMG! THE NEW TEST SCORES ARE LOWER THAN THE OLD TEST SCORES! http://bit.ly/1OdNczE
WASHINGTON STATE’S CHARTER LIMBO: More on that charter schools ruling. http://bit.ly/1K6Lizj
More Beutner: LA TIMES PUBLISHER+CEO TO BE REPLACED
http://bit.ly/1KZuAlY
JOHN OLIVER’S GUIDE TO “EVERYTHING STUDENTS NEED TO KNOW FOR BACK TO SCHOOL”
http://bit.ly/1QmCdTZ
LA Unified selects 8 schools as models for technology expansion - LA School Report http://bit.ly/1NgcKvq
LAT Editorial: WHAT WILL COMMON CORE TEST RESULTS SHOW? Comparing old+new results like comparing apples+porcupines
http://bit.ly/1OvoWaf
CHARTER SCHOOLS SHOULDN’T BE LITMUS TEST FOR NEW CHIEF
http://bit.ly/1KZjPQI
“DON’T PANIC”, OFFICIALS SAY AS CALIFORNIA BRACES FOR LOWER STUDENT TEST RESULTS
…but “Thanks for all the fish?”
http://bit.ly/1XHc1YT
Ed Week: TEACHER EVALUATION – AN ISSUE OVERVIEW
http://bit.ly/1iuLzSc
LA Times: AUSTIN BEUTNER OUT AS L.A. TIMES PUBLISHER - Broad connection suggested
http://bit.ly/1M8KSuk
UPDATE: Tribune Publishing dismisses Los Angeles Times publisher and CEO - Chicago Tribune http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-austin-beutner-la-times-0909-biz-20150908-story.html …
Breaking: Austin Beutner out as publisher of the LA Times.
Modern Sex Ed: CALIFORNIA WILL BE FIRST IN THE NATION TO TEACH HIGH-SCHOOLERS ABOUT CONSENT, VIOLENCE, RELATIONSHIPS
http://bit.ly/1LTNauC
Aiming low: STATE BOARD OF ED SETS K-8 ATTENDANCE GOAL AT 90% http://bit.ly/1K3oHng
WASHINGTON STATE SUPREME COURT RULES CHARTER SCHOOLS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
http://bit.ly/1KX0XSt
Learn From LA Unified: WHAT NOT TO DO WHEN ROLLING OUT TECHNOLOGY | The AIR Report, LAUSD’s response + smf’s 2¢
http://bit.ly/1O8ORq9
EVENTS: Coming up next week...
• REGULAR LAUSD BOARD MEETING – Tues. September 15, 2015, Including Closed Session Items - 5:00 p.m.
NEW BUSINESS FOR ACTION:
A. Board of Education Report No. 061-15/16 : Office of the Superintendent
(Consideration of Los Angeles County Office of Education (LACOE)
2015-2018 Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) Amendments.)
Recommends the adoption of amendments to the 2015-2018 Local Control
Accountability Plan. The LCAP allows the District to update its Annual
Accountability Plan to meet the goals, services, and expenditures to
support pupil outcomes and state priorities.
B. Board of Education Report No. 064-15/16 : Office of the Chief Financial Officer
(Unaudited Actuals Report for Fiscal Year 2014-15, Gann Limit
Resolution, and Resolution to Adjust the Fiscal Stabilization Plan.)
Recommends approval of submission of the annual statement of all
receipts and expenditures of the District for the proceeding year to the
Los Angeles County Office of Education (LACOE) as required under Ed
Code 42100. Further approves adoption of Gann Limit Resolution and
resolution committing to adjust the District’s fiscal stabilization plan
by the submission of the First Interim Budget Report.
• Saturday, September 19 : INTERNATIONAL TALK LIKE A PIRATE DAY 2015 | http://bit.ly/1O9mTf9
ARRRGGGGHHHH, Mateys!!
*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:
Scott.Schmerelson@lausd.net • 213-241-8333
Monica.Garcia@lausd.net • 213-241-6180
Ref.Rodriguez@lausd.net • 213-241-5555
George.McKenna@lausd.net • 213-241-6382
Monica.Ratliff@lausd.net • 213-241-6388
Richard.Vladovic@lausd.net • 213-241-6385
Steve.Zimmer@lausd.net • 213-241-6387
...or your city councilperson, mayor, county supervisor, state
legislator, 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 at http://registertovote.ca.gov/
• If you are registered, VOTE LIKE THE FUTURE DEPENDS ON IT. THEY DO!
|
