On June 29, the Pleasanton Weekly published my letter to the editor in response to the June 21 article about the last school board meeting that occurred before summer recess. Here’s what I said:
The article on the June 19 school board meeting omitted a key fact about the new strategic plan for PUSD — it is an unfinished draft. Still to come is the most important part, a scorecard with measurable indicators of progress toward strategic goals.
Standardized tests cannot be the only indicators that students are learning what they will need to make the world a better place. [...] District leaders should push themselves to focus on measuring what matters, and not just on what is easy to test. [...]
Now is the time for taxpayers to weigh in on the scorecard being developed. What indicators do you want district leaders and board members to monitor? [...]
Let me brainstorm some answers to the question I asked others:
bold goal 1: eliminate racial, socio-economic, and gender predictability in achievement
- less than 10 percent difference between native speakers of English and ELL learners who are proficient in language arts by 5th grade
- percentage of ELL learners who remain classified as ELL for more than 3 years (should be under 20% for students of all native languages)
- less than 5 percent difference between percentage of 5th grade boys and 5th grade girls identified as eligible for enrollment in sequence 2 math in 6th grade
- less than 5 percent difference between percentage of 9th-12th grade students of Asian, Hispanic, and Caucasian ethnic identities who choose to participate in music courses, band or orchestra activities
- less than 5 percent difference between percentage of 9th-12th grade students from families with incomes under 50K and over 100K who participate in intramural or varsity sports
- less than 5 percent difference between percentages of graduates with Asian, Hispanic, and Caucasian ethnic identities who complete three years of a foreign language with grades of B or higher
- less than 5 percent difference between the percentage of Asian Hispanic, and Caucasian graduates who complete one or more AP course
- percentage of graduates who meet or exceed the standards for admission to a UC or CSU school (should be over 80% in all racial, socio-economic, and gender groups)
- percentage of 12th graders who submit college applications (should be over 95% in all race, socio-econonmic, and gender groups)
bold goal 2: optimize student learning by using innovative technologies
- percentage of teachers who have had training within the last 2 years and can skillfully use a laptop and projector in their classroom to support student learning
- percentage of 5th grade students using software to practice math skills (broken out by software program)
- percentage of 5th grade students who can use Wikipedia responsibly
- percentage of students entering 6th grade students eligible for the option to participate in a laptop program
- percentage of 6th graders who choose to participate in a laptop program
- percentage of 8th grade students skilled in using presentation software to create and organize visual aids in a persuasive speech
- percentage of 9th grade students with access to audio-visual computer programs that support the learning of French, Spanish, German, and Chinese
On July 6, the Weekly published an editorial expressing a favorable view of the district’s strategic plan. While I agree with their overall enthusiasm, I think there’s still much to do to ensure that support for implementing the strategic plan is strong across all principals, teachers, students, parents, and community members. Figuring out which indicators are most important, and then paying attention to them over time, is the key to making the plan useful.
What do you think? What should be on the balanced scorecard?
So much happens in our school district while school is out! The last day of school was June 8, but the school board had its final meeting before summer break on June 19.
The June agenda (PDF) was chock-a-block full, with approval of the budget, renewal of contracts for key district leaders, and the approval of the proposed strategic plan all up for discussion. Due to a technical glitch, the board meeting was not televised live, but a web archive of the meeting is now available.
On June 21, a newspaper article about key decisions made at the meeting was published in the Pleasanton Weekly. The article focused on the budget approvals and contract renewals, mentioning the strategic plan only in passing.
The district updated its website with a page about the strategic plan recently. It includes a lofty vision and mission, as well as eight bold goals in four areas: curriculum and instruction; personal growth; fiscal stewardship; and learning environment.
So, here’s some optional summer homework for Pleasanton residents: Read the strategic plan for yourself. Then, tell me what do you think. Has the superintendent laid out a clear vision for the district’s future? Are the bold goals achievable? Are there any big goals missing from the strategic plan?
The next regular meeting of the Pleasanton USD Board of Trustees will be held on Tuesday, October 25, 2011.
The agenda has been posted online (PDF) (and I have now succeeded in downloading it! Not sure if it was my internet connection causing problems, or a server problem at the district…)
The district will be recognizing teachers of the year tonight.
For report and discussion there are 3 items:
- state budget 2011-2012
- update on Pleasanton Partnerships in Education (PPIE)
- the transitional kindergarten program (a state mandate)
For possible action, there are 3 major items:
- policy about fees to be paid by developers of new construction, and possible mitigation thereof (see the meeting previewthat appeared in the Pleasanton Weekly online this morning)
- beginning the process of updating the master plan for facilities (reviewing and accepting cabinet’s recommendation to hire a consulting architectural firm, I believe)
- district goals and plan for 2011-2012 (discussed at Oct. 11 meeting, and being brought back for approval in modified form)
The end of the meeting will include a review of recent donations and approval of a personnel document.
The full board packet is also available in this PDF and includes minutes from the regular meeting of October 11 and the special meeting on October 14.
I will not be able to attend this evening, but plan to watch online.
I recently watched the archived webcast of the Sept. 27, 2011, meeting of the Pleasanton school board.
I want to offer my reflections on what I saw as the most interesting part of the meeting — the review of the testing completed last spring, which is analyzed over the summer and used to construct school-by-school scores on the API (Academic Performance Index). API ranges from 200 and 1000. All Pleasanton schools scored above 880 on the API, except for Village High School (a small continuation high school). District-wide, the average API was 906. (Here’s the headline from the Pleasanton Patch — Pleasanton Schools Exceed API Expectations.)
At the board meeting, board members and district cabinet members spent at least 45 minutes reviewing the district’s report on STAR results, in great detail. The other purpose of the California Standards Tests (CSTs) that almost all public school students take each spring, as required by the state’s Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) program, aside from ranking schools with the API, is to allow districts, schools, and teachers to drill down into the student data, so that teachers and principals can work together to design instructional strategies for the 2011-2012 academic year.
In the full board packet (PDF) the agenda item 13.3 includes 21 pages of supporting text and tables.
During this portion of the meeting, board and cabinet members examined patterns in the data, to see what kind of progress the district is making in closing the achievement gap. They also looked at patterns across grade levels, in Math and English/Language Arts (ELA) and Science, to see how students are responding to recent adjustments in school practices.
The patterns that I am most curious about are about closing the achievement gap in Math, and ensuring that all students are making good progress in Math from year to year. Questions we can ask from the data are:
- when students move from 5th grade into middle school, are they headed into math courses that challenge them without being overwhelming?
- when students move on to high school, are they headed into courses that will prepare them for life after high school?
- during high school, when are students meeting the minimum math standards for graduation (so they can pass the CAHSEE)?
- what proportion of students meet the challenging standards required to apply for admission to one of the University of California or California State University campuses?
Regarding the achievement gap, there are related questions:
- when students move into middle school, are they receiving equal opportunities to advance into challenging math courses, regardless of their ethnic background? are they performing at equal levels on the Math CSTs? If not, why not? Can the middle schools do something to help close those gaps?
- when students move on to high school, are we closing gaps identified at the beginning of middle school, or do we have some ethnic groups racing ahead, while others lag behind? what can the high schools do to ensure that students get the math classes they will need?
- just before high school graduation, what can we predict about whether students will be prepared to go to college, and where? If there are differences between ethnic groups, why?what can the schools or the district do to help close those gaps?
Some of these questions are answered in the archived webcast of the meeting, and other answers may be found in the 21-page budget backup for agenda item 13.3.
For more detail on the Sept. 27 school board meeting in Pleasanton, including other items that were on the agenda see this PDF.
FYI, the full board packet from the Sept. 27 meeting also includes minutes from the Sept. 13 meeting, for which I provided a preview of the agenda last month.
The next regular meeting of the Pleasanton USD Board of Trustees will be held on Tuesday, October 11, 2011. The agenda has been posted online. (PDF)
Items for report and discussion:
- CA state budget for FY2011-2012 (are revisions of the current budget still a possibility?)
- first reading of board policy on service learning
- recap the 2010-2011 goals and review goals for FY 2011-12
Items for possible action:
- resolution to support Red Ribbon Week from Oct. 22 = 30
- approve donations
- approve personnel document
The full board packet is available in this PDF; it includes the minutes from the September 27 regular board meeting.
The agenda for next Tuesday’s meeting of the Pleasanton Unified School District school board has been posted online. (PDF)
Items for report and discussion:
- current student enrollment
- district’s experience with cash-out refinancings
My note: This will be the final report to the board regarding the work of the citizens committee that examined the refinancings carried out by the school district. I wrote about the first report that the report received in July in this post on sources of community mistrust for the school district. I expect this part of the meeting to be the most interesting!
Items for possible action:
- approving donations
- amending the superintendent’s contract
- approving unaudited financial statements
- Gann appropriations limit
- sufficiency of K-12 textbooks and 9-12 instructional materials (science laboratories)
- resolution regarding AB 114
- personnel document
My note: In the board packet, part 1, the purpose of this amendment is to make it easier to factor in concessions of unpaid furlough days.
My note: The resolution, included in part 2 of the board packet, respectfully requests that the legislature and governor immediately restore the decision making and budgetary flexibility that educational agencies need to deal with midyear budget cuts, should they occur.
Don’t miss this editorial by Tom Torlakson and Darrell Steinberg today:
Ask a baseball fan how good his team’s shortstop is, and he can point to more than two dozen statistics, from the number of double plays turned to how often the player strikes out with runners on base.
Ask about the performance of a public school in California, and you’ll get one lonely number based solely on one set of end-of-the-year test results.
It was never meant to work this way. The state’s school accountability system, adopted a dozen years ago, was supposed to adapt over time as needs changed and new tools developed. Call it one more piece of unfinished business in a state with a lot of work to do.
Read more in the Sacramento Bee: Click here.