Study Session Meeting

No content available.

[6] Ray Rodriguez: I'd like to call this meeting to order. It's the October 17, 2019 regular board meeting for the Newark Unified School District. Roll call, Ms. Aquino, please. Thank you.

[22] SPEAKER_17: Thank you. President Rodriguez?

[25] Nancy Thomas: Present.

[26] SPEAKER_17: Vice President Martinez? Here. Member Gutierrez? Present. Member John? Here. Member Nguyen? Here.

[35] Ray Rodriguez: Remember Gutierrez will be looking at the video. It's her daughter's second birthday, so.

[40] Bowen Zhang: Will she be here later today?

[42] Ray Rodriguez: Probably not. She might. That's a secret. No, I don't think she's coming. But the nice thing is when we're on camera and everything, we can look at it live, which is great. OK, we need to move to the agenda. approval of the agenda. You want to do it now or you want to do it after the study session? Well, no, that's the agenda. The study session is part of it. So I need a motion and a second for approval of the agenda. There's other items in consent that we can pull later if we want to.

[93] Elisa Martinez: I move approval of the agenda.

[94] Ray Rodriguez: Okay, member Martinez moves. I second. Nguyen seconds. Please vote. Let's try, if we're hooked up up there, now we'll do it by hands. Okay, let's do it by hands. Okay, thank you. Sure, what do we, how come it didn't go up there? Anyway, we'll work on it, okay. OK, public comment before we go to our board study session, which is ed services, elementary report card, educational services, CAA, SPP data, and public comment. And then after that, it's public comment. OK, so before we go to that, Mr. Knoop, do you want to come up?

[152] Cary Knoop: Good evening. First, I'd like to say something about the CASPE scores study session. I know this information has been out to the district, what, two months, three months? And it's just been released publicly last week or so. So there's ample time to create material for this. So when you have a study session, I don't know if the board members actually get something, but I would hate to go into a study session without any documents. You know, how can you do a study session if you haven't prepared any documents? So even if the board is kept up to date, that's really transparent for the board members, but that's not transparent for the public. So I really think it's very important, and I saw this last Tuesday as well, when you have a study session to get a document attached to the agenda so people can actually see what on earth is going to be discussed, what the points are. And they can study it. maybe ask sensible questions and so on. Just a little thing about, continue about the report card thing. I understand I can't say grades anymore. It's now rubrics. Grades is, I guess, from another generation. We cannot rank people anymore or whatever for whatever reason. So rubrics or whatever it is, you know, this is a service for our parents, including myself. I'm a parent of an elementary school as well. And three levels is just not enough. I think you need to tell the parents where your kids are. And there's nothing wrong with ranking. You know, we don't have to say, oh, every kid is, give them, well, just give them a pat on the back and they're all super kids. Yes, they are. But the whole world, our economy, our whole life is about ranking. When they go to university, if they go to university, they have to be ranked as well, so better get used to it. That's the way of the world. So, three, and then saying, well, you know, my kid, your kid is already reaching the standard, so who cares? That's not in line with maximizing the output of every individual kid. You don't say a kid that reaches the standard say, well, just go sit in the corner and read. We don't have any time for you because you already, we're standards based. You already reached the standard, so we don't care for any excellence. Is that equity? Yeah, I guess that's equity, but it's not the kind of equity I hope this district stands for. So if we want to get, you know, we're always talking about the Facebook people who buy these homes here. If we want to get these people here, start thinking about grades. Rank your kids. Make sure that the parents know how well is my kid doing. And I hope that the board sticks to its guns. There's an administrative regulation. Stick to it. You know, who's in control here? Who's in control? Thank you.

[338] Ray Rodriguez: Thank you, Mr. New. Superintendent, my understanding is once we get something up here that it becomes a public document. Correct. So how do we get this to the community?

[349] SPEAKER_08: We have copies ready. OK. So just to clarify that, the board is getting it at the same time the community is getting it. Right. The board had none of this prior. And part of the reason why you didn't have anything prior is we had another board meeting on Tuesday. And sometimes we need more time to prepare documents and reports for the board study sessions. That's part of the reason why. We're going to have a report tonight as well on the standards and the pilot. So we should be able to clarify some of those questions in our study as well.

[376] Ray Rodriguez: OK. Got it. Thank you. So we're going to have copies now or? Yeah, we have copies available. OK. Thank you. Thank you much. Anyone else? Oh, I'm sorry.

[392] Cindy Parks: Miss Parks. Good evening. You forgot me. So I just kind of wanted to dovetail into what Harry had said. Back 30 years ago, well, no, that wasn't 30 years ago. Back about 25 years ago when my daughter was in second grade, I had a document that had one of her writings that came home. And there was a ton of bread mark on there. And yet the teacher gave her an A. So I went back to the teacher during the teacher conference and said, I'm a little confused. This has a bunch of red marks on it. You say she got 100. But I see a lot of red. So what exactly do you think you said to her, and what have you said to me? And so we had a good discussion about that. Because what the markings on there, the grading on there, the rubrics on there, whatever you're saying, that's what the teacher is telling the parent is going on in the classroom. And it wound up that she wasn't grading the content. She wasn't grading the spelling. She was grading them being able to express themselves, to be able to write. And I, you know, we had a discussion about maybe she could have been, you know, said draft because then I would have known because I'm looking at the document. What she puts on there, the grade is what she's telling me my daughter is doing. And I think that that's what's important with the report card is that that's what you're telling the parents. That's what you're telling the students how well they're doing. That's the audience. That's the audience for that report card. And I think that when you go from a four to a three and then some little note goes home that tells the parents, oh, by the way, now that the report cards are coming out, we're going to a one through three rubric. Oh, except for sixth grade, science and social studies and PE. We're going to give grades for those. So what continuity do you have? in your reporting to the parents what's going on. Because then the minute that they get to junior high and high school, they're getting letter grades. So I just think that there needs to be some continuity. And the five rubric that you approved on March 21st that came from CSBA has the five rubric, which doesn't give that more determined, you know, drilled down communication to the parents. So I just wanted to be able to say that and I think that's, and if you're not going to do that, if you want to do this rubric thing, then why not just do pass-fail? Why three? Because if you're going to say that they did well, then they did well or they didn't. There's no in-between. Because if you almost, does that mean that you're not or does it mean that you are? You know, why the in-between? Thank you.

[573] SPEAKER_08: OK, superintendent, let's go to the workshop. Thank you, President Rodriguez. I'm going to introduce one of our directors, Ariel Dolowich, who's going to lead us through the study. Have you all met Ariel?

[587] Ray Rodriguez: OK. Good evening, board.

[588] Toni Stone: Good evening.

[589] Ray Rodriguez: You're very good at finding us and saying hi and everything. I appreciate it. And Miss Salinas, she's?

[600] SPEAKER_08: She had a family. Urgent and family matter to take care of this evening.

[606] Ray Rodriguez: Thank you.

[608] SPEAKER_10: All right, so good evening. I definitely understand the sensitivity around the K6 report card. I understand the concerns. I want to provide some context before we provide some next steps. And to take a step back, yes?

[624] Ray Rodriguez: Do you have anybody from med services here? Could you?

[627] SPEAKER_08: He is from med services. He is.

[629] SPEAKER_10: I mean, anyone else? I, yeah, I have Mr. Sheving who's a teacher on the report card committee for music. And then our assessment technician who also works in Ed Services, Mr. Dinsmore. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Didn't mean to interrupt you. No problem. So to provide some context, one, there's an element for communication with the community and families. And two, there's also an understanding of what it means to transition to standards-based grading for teachers. So I arrived over the summer, and Common Core Standards came to us in 2014, which was the initial time Newark Unified looked at revamping or updating the report card. If you look at the background and history just to date back to last year, K-6 teachers expressed interest in improved alignment and reliability from the report card. They did not believe that they were genuinely correlated to the common core standards. Therefore, a report card committee formed in 2018-19 last year. And that committee, in fact, met five times. There's agendas, sign-in sheets, and minutes. So that's the basis for the background and history. And you can see the five meeting times there. Again, coming in afterwards, I'm recounting some of that history for context. Each elementary site had representatives and they discussed various changes to the report card. On February 21st, according to the minutes, the committee voted for grades K through 5 to change from a 1 to 4 rubric to a 1 to 3 rubric. Specifically, a 3 would equal met, a 2 would equal approaching, and a 1 would equal not met. And on the back end, the technology on the report card is so that it's synced, not yet, but this is the goal, that it's synced to each of the Common Core Standards. Is there not a place on it for exceeds? Essentially three encompasses met or exceeds. And there's also the comment section at the very bottom that the committee determined as an appropriate place to acknowledge students who have demonstrated exceeding the standard. And then for the very point that one of our parents spoke of, specifically transitioning to the junior high, the committee detailed for sixth grade to go to letter grades A through D. So the rationale was so that there would be a smoother transition to the junior high level when, in fact, they receive letter grades.

[797] Elisa Martinez: Excuse me, but that was only for social study, per your comment, per your note there, and social studies, science, and PE.

[804] SPEAKER_10: Correct.

[807] Elisa Martinez: Some subjects are going to get one through three and then other subjects a letter grade.

[811] SPEAKER_10: ELA and math would get one through three and then specifically social studies, science and PE would get a letter grade.

[818] Bowen Zhang: So I wonder who make up the committee that voted on this?

[824] SPEAKER_10: I can certainly get you those names. Who makes up the committee?

[827] Bowen Zhang: Yeah, how are the committee members selected or and is there any parent input or who actually, I mean, gather and make the decision. I just want to see the member make up whether we have input from whether our teachers, our staff, our parents, or any other members from the community.

[848] SPEAKER_10: I can certainly find out the answer in terms of the process the principal used to either select the representative or if the representatives volunteered themselves.

[860] SPEAKER_08: But it was largely a committee of teachers is my understanding. I don't know, maybe you could shed some light on that. You were here. Could you speak to that, please? Yes.

[871] SPEAKER_09: Thank you. The group that I was on was only teachers led by the former administrator here. OK. Thank you.

[884] Ray Rodriguez: Can I interrupt for a second? Mm-hmm. Board, we have different ways of, when we do a workshop, we can go back and forth, which is fine, if that's what you want to do. Or we can wait. How long is your presentation, more or less? Approximately 10 more minutes. OK.

[901] SPEAKER_10: OK. Thank you. So to reframe the purpose of the report card, teachers are interested in correlating the Common Core Standards with the actual Newark report card rows. And so what that means is if you look in any report card throughout the Bay Area or California, They're not going to be capturing every single standard that a teacher is assessing. And so what we would do with IT and with our grade book is we would correlate the work of the report card committee is to correlate the actual common core standards that are being taught in the classroom with the main essential standards reflected in the report card. Second, K-6 teachers. There is a rationale that underscores standards-based grading. It's provided by the California Department of Education. There's also an article provided by Educational Leadership. It's public tonight and it's provided for you in terms of validating the fact that students either met our approaching standard or did not meet standard. So for those reasons, California Department of Education is advocating a move for districts throughout the state of California to transition to standards-based grading. I mentioned the technical transition and synergy. That has not yet occurred. And I'll speak to that later when I come back around. So school districts in California, and I was just speaking about a parent to this, we can provide these documents. There's information, for instance, on Fremont Unified's website. What the report card we have, they have transitioned one to three. I know the parent I was speaking with had said that it just transitioned one to three for K-2, and that third grade and above was one to four still. That's not the information we have from Fremont. If you look at some of those other districts, San Ramon Valley Unified, Napa Valley Unified, Mount Diablo Unified, and Pleasanton Unified, those are just examples, not exhaustive by any means, of districts that have already transitioned to standards-based grading. So this is happening throughout the state of California. Effectively, we would be farther along, I believe, if this conversation had started last year. But we find ourselves squarely in phase two. And if you look at what I mean by that, so phase one, if the report card committee started meeting last year, and they started making votes, making changes, I think there is a lot to be desired in terms of some of that communication previously. But if you look at phase one last year when the work started with that committee comprised of teachers, this year would be phase two. And what do I mean, essentially, by phase two is that the report card committee right now is correlating those common core standards, all the standards that they're agreeing they're teaching with each respective grade level and how that correlates directly with the rows of the Newark report card. That's what they're doing. That's what other districts have done. And then we take that from a technology standpoint with IT and we correlate it for the teachers so that if they're assessing, for example, standard three, and if you drill down standard 3.1, 3.3, That would populate for each grade level for a teacher in their grade book. And they'd put a one, two, or three. And then according to Marzano's Power Law, which is an algorithm that most districts are using, it would compute not based on what the student previously earned, but what they would earn in that overall standard for that trimester. So it's scientifically proven. It's mathematically justified. And that wouldn't happen until next year. because what needs to happen now is communication with the community and the families, but at the same time, the work correlating those standards, which is not yet done. For instance, we haven't met with science teachers. We haven't met with PE teachers. And then what I would do, twofold, one, hold town hall or community gathering type meetings for parents to be able to have some dialogue like I've heard here tonight. But the other one is to go out to each respective site and provide that training. One, from the philosophy or rationale, and two, the technical on how you would use gradebook so that when the teacher's gradebook changes next year to a one, two, and three, that they would know exactly what they're dealing with in terms of gradebook. That hasn't been the case this year.

[1196] SPEAKER_08: So let me try to translate some of that. So some of the big differences between standards-based and standards-referenced. Standards-referenced is kind of where we've been. Standards-based is the trend where we're going. But I think the point that you're making, in my understanding of standards-based, is yes, they're moving to three rating areas. But the depth of what they're measuring is much deeper than what is done otherwise. And it's standardizing. grade level across, like, let's say third grade's, give me a subject, language arts or writing. So what you do is you're looking at, is it on grade level? Is it on standard? And the bar is the same for all kids. Now, reporting that for a teacher, there's more density behind those numbers. And that's the challenge with the standards-based. So having three levels in the sense of reporting for instead of a grade allows the teachers to go deeper with those three. So let me give you another translation of standards-based. Standards-based is really behind the idea that time is the variable and learning's the constant. In a standard, in the system we have now, learning's the variable and time is the constant. So the challenge of standards-based or the purpose of standards-based is to help all kids rise, to help all kids meet grade level, and give the supports and give them multiple opportunities to be successful, which is different. But there is more density in how they report and how they track standards and what they're doing. The only reason I'm aware, I had a lot of experience personally with Bob Marzano. So let me tell you a little about Bob Marzano. Mr. Marzano has actually become very famous internationally for his research around education and learning. And one of the things he's most famous for is writing a book It was actually a meta-analysis where they look at all data from all different types of education data, brain research data, and he found a correlation with certain things and strategies that are most successful called high-yield instructional strategies. So this is based on those kind of premises. So it's a different way of teaching, and I know that from a parent view, there is a lot of communication that's going to be required. But this whole idea of ranking is something that, takes some time to explain. But the goal is to get all kids to grade level so they're all successful. And if they're at grade level, they should be able to accelerate faster. So the difference is that we would let them go faster if they're ready or help them get to the standard with the appropriate supports, giving teachers some of that flexibility to do that. So I just wanted to point that out.

[1362] SPEAKER_10: Appreciate that. Before I jump into this, so again, the committee had commented. that there's a place for exceeds in the comment section on the report card, and that a three essentially encompasses exceeds. And I know that's a point of concern from one of our parents. Next steps for ed services for the community is to provide a district wide newsletter before trimester one ends November 8th. For parent teacher conferences, we want to provide the guidance sheet that answers frequently asked questions so that there's reference and support. and that there'll be an informational presentation created for each of the principals or Ed Services can come out to speak with the staff so that they feel supported in terms of speaking with parents in those parent-teacher conferences. And so, I'll pause right there and see what comes up because I know there are a lot of questions around this. Okay.

[1422] Ray Rodriguez: Member Martí.

[1425] Elisa Martinez: Thank you. Thank you for reviewing. I definitely don't have the expertise to comment on whether this approach is better or worse. So thank you for giving that. I think my concern is more around, again, the process that we follow. I always come back to process. Again, I do have kids in the district. So this is, it feels like the third change in the last five years, if you will, like five to four, now to three. And I always believe that there should be a purpose as to why we are making a change. Because then how do we know the last change we made didn't work because either we didn't execute excellently or because we didn't give it time to work, right? So I recognize that teacher input is absolutely valuable and absolutely this might be the direction that we should be going in. I would like to see more deliberate planning ahead, especially, you know, as members of the community mentioned, again, most of us are new, but I do remember earlier this year bringing CSBA policy that we approved with a rating one to five, right? So why that disconnect? That really concerns me. So do we have a very clear path to understand what our baseline is so that we have an ability to really measure the impact? Because if it's, you know, the latest and greatest way to do it, fantastic. But how do we believe this approach is going to help the performance of our kids? That is, if we don't have that at the onset, then it doesn't give me comfort that we are clear on why we're doing this. So it's more commentary. Frankly, again, I can't comment on the methodology, it's how are we going to make sure that this works for us.

[1548] SPEAKER_08: I would like to see if the teacher, your teacher that's here, could speak a little bit to, from a teacher perspective, has it helped make a, in your opinion, what do you think it's done to help reach more kids or to be a better approach? I think it's important to hear.

[1563] Ray Rodriguez: Mr. Sheving, you're being asked to come to the podium. We go back alone.

[1569] SPEAKER_08: So just from your teaching, from your perspective, what are your thoughts about, has it helped, do you feel that it's making a difference and helping you reach more kids.

[1578] SPEAKER_09: For me personally, the 3 as opposed to a 4 or a 5, well, basically it's a consensus. The 3 is a consensus of that group of teachers. And there is, within that group of teachers, there is a great concern about what exactly we were calling a 4. I mean, with our previous scoring, it had to be exceeding grade level. And we're teaching a particular grade level. My curriculum as a first grade teacher is first grade curriculum. So we can try to give an accurate accounting to parents of what exceeds that grade level, but our assessments in our curriculum don't necessarily give us the tools to consistently do it. And part of this committee's work is that we, as teachers, should be throughout this district very consistent and very clear about what those things mean. We shouldn't be coming up with, you know, oh, this is a for because. Some things we have that may fit into what is a four, a three, a two, or a one, like our writing rubrics. But when it comes to math, we basically give assessments on what a first grader can do. We're not giving assessments in math on what a second grade student can do. So, it's about being consistent, it's about, you know, being, well, just knowing what that exceeds standards means. So, in that way, I'd have to agree a little bit with, you know, the philosophy that we know what a one is. far below is we're going to have to do a lot to help that child to get up to grade level. We can understand a two, that child is almost there. You know, we just need to do a little bit more at our grade level. We got to get them up to grade level. And the important thing is, yes, that we are on grade level. Thank you. Thank you.

[1736] Ray Rodriguez: So I want to just say something quickly. My thinking is not around the process, although I understand Member Martinez. But with my time on the board, we kind of use California School Board Association, CSBA. And they give us sample policies, and we normally adopt them. And a lot of times, there is back and forth between what CSBA says and what maybe AXA or credentialing. In education, there's always a difference of opinion. So in setting up the committee, then the committee obviously made a decision that they wanted to change it and go one, two, and three. And so the communication there kind of got off a little bit. And we'll talk internally about that. I've already talked to the superintendent. hearing Mr. Sheving, it's obvious that the committee felt very strongly that this was better for kids. And that's what we're all about. We want to make sure that everything that's done is to move our kids forward. And we're talking about one, two, three now. And six months from now, they might say, well, we need to change that. But I think to the parent, when the parent comes in and talks to the teacher about their student, about their child, That conversation has to be very, very simple so that the parent knows what they need to do in order to help move their child forward. And that's basically what the bottom line on this thing is. But, you know, as frustrating as it is when we set up what policy and it changes, if we know the reason why, it just makes us feel a lot better. That's all.

[1855] SPEAKER_10: I would agree based on last year, although I wasn't here, that the communication and the plan of action needs to be clear and consistent. So two comments just to close it because initially I wanted to allocate 30 minutes to each, the report card presentation and CASP because now that the data is public, it deserves attention. But two things, one, I mean, that's just a very concise plan of action in terms of moving forward from Ed Services and we can kind of develop that, further develop that and get it out there to the community. I think too, just to say it very simply is our report card wasn't connected or genuinely reflected of all of the standards, the Common Core standards that the students are assessed on throughout the year by teachers. And so to bring that up to speed, That was the work of the report card, or is the work of the report card.

[1914] Ray Rodriguez: So we're, somebody else, we're good, I'm moving on. Please express our appreciation to the committee members, Mr. Scheving and everyone else, how much we appreciate the fact that, you know, they served on the committee.

[1926] Phuong Nguyen: Go ahead, go ahead. I do have concerns because the range between within a 3 is from 75% to 100. and a 2 is 74 to 50, and 1 is 0 to 49. And I know on the progress report that I got, which I appreciate the percentage because I want to know where my child is at, at what level. And is that percentage going to be on the report card? Because if my child is on the lower end of a 3, she's not excelling. And for me, that is a concern. And so, And she's very smart and she will articulate to me that, mom, I'm doing great, I'm at standard, I'm passing. No, but that's not, I don't, and so I think that that is an issue. I think that parents would appreciate to have the percentage laid out for them to see if their child is on the low end or on the high end of the standard. Because that way, we as parents can be more involved. and work with teachers to get them to standards or, you know, to help them to get them to exceed standards a little bit. Because a 2, at 2 and my daughter is at a 50, she's not passing, you know. And I'm going to hold her accountable, but I'm also going to hold the teachers accountable.

[2016] SPEAKER_10: I have a fifth grader as well, and I understand that point. My understanding, and we can go back to the minutes, is that percentages were not reflected to answer your question on the report card. And in full transparency, the objective long-term with standards-based grading is to have a mindset shift away from percentages. Just to say in terms of one of those long-term goals, in other words, they met. they're approaching, or they did not meet. Yeah, but that's not good enough.

[2050] SPEAKER_08: But I think part of where I think we can bridge that, I think part of bridging that is, I understand moving away from percentages, but I think what needs to fill that, what replaces it, is a list of here's the standards your child has yet to master that are very specific and detailed in order to achieve grade level standards. So I think that's the difference is The way you get away from percentage is being able to be explicit about these are the specific grade level standards that your child is missing. And they're actually much more detailed than a percentage. So I think that's my advice to the committee to start looking at how do you do a, if it's approximately, if a child's in a two and approximately moving towards a standard, what does that child need to know and be able to do to be able to meet? And what are those discrete standards they need to complete in that content? And I have some examples I can share with you, but I think that's kind of the feedback for the committee. And I think the other part of that is how does that play out in a report to parents? There's two things that break down that are challenging in standards-based education. One of them is the management of the data, and that's one that we've got to really pay attention to. So I think that's where I've seen success is when you could actually, because that's actually more helpful to the parent to say they really need to know more about, supporting details, ensure constructive response. That's something that the parent can do something with. It's more meaningful than a percentage, but if we don't make it more meaningful than a percentage, it's going to fall apart.

[2140] Phuong Nguyen: Exactly, because right now it correlates to our low test scores. We meet standards. Oh, you guys are meeting standards at 75%. It doesn't increase our test scores. It doesn't I'm not saying that I'm putting all of this on the teachers to be able to perform and increase our test scores. I'm accountable, I'm a parent. So if the teachers can help me understand that my child is, even though she's meeting standards, at 75% she's not meeting standards to me. And it's not gonna increase her test scores and her ability to you know, excelling that.

[2181] Elisa Martinez: And I know we have other scores to speak about, but that's exactly what I'm talking about process. I'm not talking about process of going back and forth. I'm talking about the process of how we make a decision. So it frankly isn't even, I absolutely trust, you know, the teacher's experience and that relationship they have with a student to understand and measure and get their consistency. I am not the right person to challenge that. But what I do challenge is, why did we embark on this? We're a year into this. Now we're having this conversation. How does it really relate? And that, frankly, it's our district staff who should be putting some structure around the why. It's not, again, it's not for, Frank, a lot of this will be a cultural shift. For us as parents, we grew up with percentages. We grew up with A pluses. So it is a big shift. Again, we are not the experts. But if you help us understand, not just us pointing to Phuong and myself, but to the community, and we take some of that pressure off of, hey, this is maybe the right process. So frankly, that is what I'm talking about. It's not about the particulars.

[2258] Phuong Nguyen: Thank you. And I think if we explain it and we gradually move into it and we show the percentages And then we can eventually move away from it because, again, it's about educating, you know, the general population about how certain things are done and correlating it to the standards and how you guys want to, you know, perceive that. But it's just us knowing what the process is.

[2284] SPEAKER_08: And one more thing to take back to the committee is this is actually a great teachable moment. And for many years in the transition from standards reference to standards base, it would be totally appropriate to issue two report cards or one report card that holds both so you can show how it's progressing from one to another. And then that helps parents bridge that gap over time. So we could talk about that as well.

[2307] SPEAKER_10: Well, thank you. There are pros and cons. And I can't speak for last year. So I can speak for moving forward.

[2313] SPEAKER_08: But I did track those questions. I will be working on that. We can go to the next one. Sorry. But that is really a big shift, so we need to spend more time on that.

[2323] SPEAKER_10: So feel free to bring me back, because I don't think 12 minutes will do justice. And there are some additional slides at the end that are site-specific. And they're also made available tonight to the public as well. So first, I'm going to address it from a district standpoint. So just recently, the data was publicly released. We're two objectives. One, presenting it, I think, in an honest depiction, celebrating what deserves to be celebrated, and then also referencing our local indicators, which oversee specifically five local indicators, which hold us accountable at the local level. So, as you're probably aware, the California Assessment of Student Performance in the progress assessment, it's a summative assessment used to evaluate student learning with common core state standards, which we were just speaking of, at the end of each school year. Information from CAS assessments are used to inform program instructional practices, as well as hold us accountable for the goals we've outlined in the LCAP. And that's the connection with the local indicators. So we're gonna provide an overview, some district level next steps, And since time won't allow, we'll answer as many questions as we can. And I'm happy to come back. So foreshadowing ELA. We grew the most in ELA, almost four full percentage points, which is not good enough, and our work is still ahead of us. But it definitely deserves note that we didn't decrease. English learner students who met or exceeded If you look at that in the three-year trend, they doubled, effectively, 7% to 14%. In fourth grade, specifically, for English Language Arts, there was a real bump, 41% to 47%, and fifth, 41% to 52%. Our African American students, when we talk about our achievement gap, they have grown the most, 34% to 45%, from 2017 to 2019. and Asian students also continue to increase by 8%, 65% to 73%. Subgroups, Asian, Filipino, white, and two or more races, as reported last year, continue to score higher than African American and Hispanic Latino students. English learner, special education, and socioeconomic disadvantaged do score below average, and again, specific sites deserve recognition. Also, finally, this assessment only occurs 3rd through 5th, 7th to 8th, and grade 11, so one grade at the high school level. So we're not talking about all of our students. Again, if you look at ELA and math, we increased in both. Last year was the first year of Big Ideas math adoption, almost a 2% increase, but that would be a stretch. And like I said, if you round up, approximately 4% growth for English language arts. Another way to look at it, and we don't have the time, but is to disaggregate it and look at the ones, twos, threes, and fours. Threes and fours define met or exceeded. And one of the differences, we were just talking about standards-based grading, is this is a computer-adapted assessment, as you may be aware. And so students that are exceeding are able to demonstrate that mastery because of the computer adaption. If you look at our three-year trend, you can see that 2017 to 2018, slight dip, and then it just rose. So the four percentage points is looking at the three-year overall trend. These are grades specific to grade 3 through 6. And one of the patterns you'll note is that there's generally an increase over time for the elementary grades. And you can see that with the different colored bar graphs. However, you're also looking at points of observation. When you get to grade 7 through 11, and again, this only assesses grade 7, 8, and grade 11, not 9, 10, or 12. you can see that that trend from the elementary grades takes a different turn. Two important slides coming up. This one, socioeconomically disadvantaged are English learners and special education. And I mentioned how they score below our district average, and you can see it there. However, again, English learners, if you look at 2017 to 2019, again, they doubled. Even special education moved from 7% to 10%. Not good enough, but the data speaks for itself. And then just as importantly, if you break it down by ethnicity, you can see African-American students, Asian, Filipino, Hispanic, Latino, white, two or more. And those slides definitely deserve more time. We started this year with a focus on equity and a number of districts are moving towards professional development with culturally responsive strategies. I think that's something to be noted in terms of our achievement gap. This is the same data in a different format. And this is also the same data. It doesn't include all of the different ethnicities, only four of them, Latino, African-American, white, and Asian. But all the other pie charts are the same data that you saw in the bar graphs. So I just wanted to provide it to the board and the public in different formats because it paints the same picture, but it's depicted in different visuals. In the interest of time, Just to conclude with ELA, we have a presenter coming out tomorrow for all K-6 teachers. They're focusing on integrated ELD for English learners through Reader's Workshop, which is our curriculum that we use K-6. That same presenter worked with our principals yesterday. We scaled back four cycles of inquiry based on data to two. to drill down and support the teachers' work with the students so that it mirrors what's really happening in the classroom. Two concrete cycles run right now before winter break, the other one January through March. And then what we want to do is really support students and motivate students so they're at their peak performance this spring. This district hasn't done that before, and so that's a different approach. We are focusing on writing across the curriculum for the next generation science standards. The only full-day staff development day for K-6 is December 19th. We're also going to bring in the ELA curriculum. And we have a partnership between Newark Memorial High School and Alameda County Office of Education. They were here today working with our curriculum assessment. And then this is a big program initiative. But SEAL has started, and it's K-1 this year. and it will expand next year, K-2. And ultimately, there's a wealth of strategies, both culturally responsive, but also strategies for English learners embedded in SEAL. And the takeaway would be for us, not just to work with Title I schools, there are four elementary Title I schools, but to spread that district wide. PsyOps strategies, which reinforce those SEAL strategies at the K-1 level, are already happening right now in the junior high. five minutes.

[2833] SPEAKER_08: Ariel I'd recommend that we maybe bookmark it and bring it back. Okay. Maybe capture questions to this point but I think we should have it come back either as a staff report or a study session at the next meeting just so this is really important I kind of don't want to rush it I think it's better to have the board have time and the community have time to get questions to us and then that's my suggestion to the board but it's at the board's pleasure how you want to handle it.

[2861] Ray Rodriguez: I think on both, it would probably be good to bring it back so we can talk about it some more. But based on the information we've already gotten, because we got this a while back, and what you shared with us, were there any questions of him on this at the present time by the board?

[2886] Elisa Martinez: Not for me.

[2887] Ray Rodriguez: OK. I have one. A large part of our student population are mixed children, where they can put down that they're Hispanic or Latino, or they could put down that they're half African-American, half Anglo or white. So can you help me? I mean, I think I know, but just to make sure, because things change sometimes. It's not by surname, right?

[2923] SPEAKER_08: They self-identify. It's how they self-identify. Self-identify, right. We don't describe.

[2928] Ray Rodriguez: They tell us. So they decide. So can they fill out two forms?

[2933] SPEAKER_10: No, they only fill out one. But two or more races, or if they identify Latino and Hispanic, and that's predominant, then that's how it's going to be reflected in the report.

[2944] Ray Rodriguez: OK. So the student fills out a form. So what happens with the little kids? The parents. The parents do, right. Now, the other thing is when you're breaking down the Latinos, then you have the English speakers, and then you have the predominantly Spanish speakers. Is that something that's broken down also?

[2960] SPEAKER_10: Yeah, the English learners. Right, and that's English. Yeah.

[2965] Ray Rodriguez: So when you're talking about the Latino group, those are Hispanics that are Latinos that speak English.

[2972] SPEAKER_10: They can be in both. They can be in both. It's the EL that breaks it out.

[2976] Ray Rodriguez: Right, right. Yeah. OK. That's another one, because it's split. Some of them, they speak Spanish at home and others, they speak English at home, but they're Latinos. It's always good to kind of review that, because a lot of times, not that everybody likes being labeled anything.

[3000] SPEAKER_10: If they are labeled English learner, I can also come back and discuss the process of reclassification?

[3005] Ray Rodriguez: Right. Got it. Okay. So we'll bring this back.

[3012] SPEAKER_08: Oh, yeah. And I would suggest while you're processing it at home on your own time, if you want to just email me any questions, additional questions that you want us to speak to when we bring it back, that'll help us shape it to what you want. OK. OK? That's good. Thank you. Thank you, Ariel.

[3038] Ray Rodriguez: So before we go to closed session, we have public comment on closed session items. And in closed session, we're going to have 4.1, Public Employee Discipline Dismissal Release, Conference with Labor Negotiator Employee Organizations, NTA and CSCA, Public Employee Appointment or Employment, 4.3 will be the director of special education. 4.4, conference with legal counsel regarding anticipated litigation. Would anybody like to come up and address us on any of these before we go to closed session? OK. Seeing none, we'll go to closed session.

No minutes available.