Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Desired Outcomes for Tonight’s Discussion
1. Build a common understanding of: SFUSD’s strategies to create quality schools and educational experiences; how creating a measure to rank quality within the context of student assignment might be harmful to schools; and how we will create opportunities to evaluate policy options with an equity lens.
2. Receive guidance from the Board on how to prioritize policy goals when developing options to present to the Board on 11/18/2019.
2
Tonight’s Agenda 1. Staff Presentation (45 mins)
a. Contextb. Quality Schools and Equitable Accessc. How to prioritize goals for a new elementary
student assignment policy
2. Public Comment (25 mins)
3. Board Discussion (50 mins)
3
● Educational Placement Center ○ Jeff Kang, New Executive Director○ EPC at a Glance○ Update on Online Application Pilot○ Marketing historically under enrolled schools
● Discover/Apply/Enroll Support for Familieso Enrollment materials
o Online tools
o Closest School, Attendance Area, CTIP1, PreK
o Search schools
Update on 2020-21 Enrollment 4
Key Dates• October 19, 2019
Enrollment Fair
• December 13, 2019 Lowell deadline
• January 17, 2020 Application deadline
• Week of March 23, 2020Families receive school offers
• April 10, 2020Last day to register to accept offer
Context
Each year, the Board’s Ad Hoc Committee on Student Assignment hosts a series of public working meetings with staff to monitor SFUSD’s student assignment policy.
This year’s focus is Resolution 189-25A1: Developing a Community Based Student Assignment System for SFUSD (Approved 12/11/2018)
6
Current Policy● Video● Board Policy ● Interactive highlights
Policy Development Materials● September 16, 2019● May 13, 2019● April 15, 2019● March 18, 2019● December 4, 2018
www.sfusd.edu/adhoccommittee
Supporting Materials
● October 3rd Board Update
● Launched new web page: www.sfusd.edu/studentassignment
● Building Content○ Why we’re redesigning student assignment○ History of student assignment: legal action, policy and
practice shifts, and major reform efforts 1978-2019○ Data○ Community engagement
● Will post regular updatesSFUSD explores new elementary school student assignment policy
Additional Information
7
8
Community Engagement
Policy Development Timeline
Fall 2019 Spring 2020 June 2020 Fall 20212020-21 SY*
Board approves new student assignment policy
for elementary schools
Modify infrastructure to support new policy*
Launch enrollment for 2022-23 SY
Develop Definitions, Goals, Priorities, Theory
of Action, + Options
Gather input from community and develop recommendation
* Infrastructure development timeline may take longer depending on scale of change
9
November 18
Ad Hoc Committee Definitions, goals, priorities, theory of action, and options
(review proposals and provide feedback)
December 3
Committee of the Whole
Staff Recommendation: Definitions, goals, priorities, theory of action,
options, and community engagement plan
Action: Green light to launch community engagement
September 16
Ad Hoc Committee Potential policy goals and priorities (discussed and
provided feedback)
October 21
Ad Hoc Committee on Student Assignment
Quality schools and equitable access. Policy
goals and priorities. (Discuss and provide feedback)
Fall 2019
Objective: Develop Definitions, Goals, Priorities, Theory of Action, + Policy Options
SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
Desired Outcome 1: Build a common understanding of: SFUSD’s
strategies to create quality schools and educational experiences; how creating a measure to rank quality within the context of student assignment might be
harmful to schools; and how we will create opportunities to evaluate policy options with an
equity lens.
10
11
● We consistently hear that all families want access to high quality schools.
● Student assignment in itself does not create high quality schools.
● Student assignment can help create equitable access to quality schools.
● Creating equitable access to quality schools is not the same as ensuring that each and every one of our schools is considered high quality.
○ PITCH is one of the many strategies the district is using to ensure each and every school is a quality school.
Quality Schools
Quality schools and educational experiences are of paramount importance● “The reality is that not all SFUSD schools are equal or offer the same
experience or access to the same or similar experiences”.
● How does the district address the perceived quality of schools, such as teaching and learning, access to programs and other educational opportunities?
● How do we define equitable opportunity and quality schools?
● The condition of school facilities sends a message to students and families. What intentional efforts have been made to renovate existing under-enrolled, under-requested schools?
Community Feedback12
Our MissionEvery day we provide
each and every student the quality instruction and equitable support
required to thrive in the 21st century.
Strategies in Action - School15
Research from the University of Chicago suggests that successful schools pay specific attention to Five Essential Supports to foster conditions for accelerated student learning. These five essential supports are:
● Leadership● Instructional Guidance● Professional Capacity ● Student Centered Learning Environment● Parent-School-Community Ties
16
Classrooms
The Instructional CoreThe Dimensions of Teaching and LearningImplementing the SFUSD Core Curriculum
Family-School Partnerships
Schools Instructional Guidance
Student Centered Learning Climate Leadership Professional
CapacityParent, Community,
School Ties
Central Office Teaching & LearningSafe &
Supportive Schools
Resource Management &
Impact
Talent Development
Family Empowerment & Community Partnerships
Board Room & The City
Policy and GovernancePriority Policy Areas
Collaboration with City Agencies and External Partners
Strategies in Action
18
From PPS Annual General Meeting 2019
Instructional Guidance
Professional Capacity
Student Centered Learning Climate
Parent-Community- School Ties
Leadership
● Underwent a redesign of student
assignment system in 2013-14
● Staff developed a School Quality Framework and assigned each school to
one of four different quality tiers
● The policy proved difficult to administer over time, and BPS implemented a “hold
harmless” policy where tiers were only
refreshed to reflect schools that had moved
up in the rankings.
● Encourages increased competition for seats
in highest ranked schools
Boston Public Schools19
Boston’s School Quality Framework ranks schools
into four tiers
20
There is significant variance in the number of requests for elementary schools, and this impacts the size and diversity of enrollment
Variances in SFUSD Enrollment
SFUSD School AReceived 1,800 requests (40%)
SFUSD School BReceived a total of 41 requests (1%)
21
We believe creating a measure to rank quality
within the context of student assignment might
be harmful to schools.
● Underwent a redesign of student assignment system in 2013-14
● Staff acknowledged that quality schools are paramount and that student assignment alone does not create quality schools
● Moved forward with a rapid policy development process (9 mo) which did not attempt to develop a concrete, measurable definition of quality schools within the context of student assignment
● Do not rank schools as part of the student assignment process
District of Columbia Public Schools
How is the option aligned with and supportive of SFUSD’s efforts to:
● Ensure every learner receives what they need to develop to their full potential?● Eliminate oppression, end biases, and ensure equally high outcomes for all
participants?● Support the creation of multicultural, multilingual, multiethnic, gender
equitable, multiracial, and inclusive practices and conditions in SFUSD schools?● Remove the predictability of success or failure that currently correlates with
any social or cultural factor?
Equity Lens: Potential Questions to Explore When
Evaluating Options
22
SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
Desired Outcome 2: Receive guidance from the Board on how to
prioritize policy goals when developing options to present to the Board on 11/18/2019
23
● Predictability
● Proximity
● Diversity
Board Resolution 189-25A1 lists a number of potential policy goals
● Predictability
● Simplicity
● Transparency
● Access to a school where sibling(s) attend
● Accessibility to neighborhood options
● A strong commitment to integrated schools
● Access to a diverse school
● Equity
● Access to a high quality school
24
Synthesized Goals
Equity Lens
Stated in Resolution
25
The goal of student assignment is to
offer families of elementary students a
high degree of predictability about
where their elementary children will
be enrolled in school.
● Families should have a right to predictability, simplicity, and transparency as they go through the student assignment system.
● Even families who are happy with their children’s schools want more predictability in the enrollment process, and are uncomfortable with a process that feels excessively complicated or random.
Board Policy Goal: Predictability
Board’s Values Informing the Goal (the WHY?)
26
The goal of student assignment is to
create strong community connections to
local schools and reduce the number of
families with elementary students
traveling across the city.
Revised to reflect input from Board during 916/19● SFUSD is committed to ensuring the quality of all
schools so that no matter where you go to school you will receive a high quality education.
● SFUSD believes that schools are an integral part of the community, and that student assignment should facilitate strong connections between schools and their surrounding communities.
Families traveling across the city to attend schools far from their home increases congestion, can contribute to tardiness and truancy, and increases the difficulty in ensuring strong community connections to local schools.
In nearly every other major school district in California, a student can enroll directly in their ‘neighborhood’ school without going through a choice process.
Board Policy Goal: Proximity
Board Values Informing the Goal (the WHY?)
27
The goal of student assignment is to
create integrated elementary schools
that provide students with the
opportunity to experience the rich
diversity of our city.
● The SFUSD strongly believes that students are best served in learning environments that are racially and socioeconomically integrated.
● There is a robust body of research that demonstrates benefits for all students from diversity—academic, cognitive, social.
● Most families want their school communities to reflect San Francisco’s socioeconomic and cultural diversity.
Board Policy Goal: Diversity
Board Values Informing the Goal (the WHY?)
Prioritizing the goals clarifies what is most important for the Board
● PREDICTABILITY
Offer families a high degree of predictability
about where their elementary children will be
enrolled in school
● PROXIMITY
Create strong community connections to local
schools and reduce the number of families with
elementary students traveling across the city
● DIVERSITY
Create integrated elementary schools that
provide students with the opportunity to
experience the rich diversity of our city
28
We are not considering policy options tonight!
The following exercise is intended to help the Board prioritize their goals for an elementary student
assignment policy.
29
Illustration A30
ProximityPredictability Diversity
Prioritized Goals
Limits choice to provide predictability and proximity even though it may/may not result in diverse schools.
Illustration B31
ProximityPredictability Diversity
Prioritized Goals
Limits choice and may require students to travel in order to prioritize diversity and provide some predictability.
Prioritizing the goals clarifies what is most important for the Board
● PREDICTABILITY
Offer families a high degree of predictability
about where their elementary children will be
enrolled in school
● PROXIMITY
Create strong community connections to local
schools and reduce the number of families with
elementary students traveling across the city
● DIVERSITY
Create integrated elementary schools that
provide students with the opportunity to
experience the rich diversity of our city
33
Board Discussion
How should staff prioritize the three policy goals when developing options to share with the Board
on November 18, 2019?
34
36
November 18
Ad Hoc Committee Definitions, goals, priorities, theory of action, and options
(review proposals and provide feedback)
December 3
Committee of the Whole
Staff Recommendation: Definitions, goals, priorities, theory of action,
options, and community engagement plan
Action: Green light to launch community engagement
September 16
Ad Hoc Committee Potential policy goals and priorities (discussed and
provided feedback)
October 21
Ad Hoc Committee on Student Assignment
Quality schools and equitable access. Policy
goals and priorities. (Discuss and provide feedback)
Fall 2019
Objective: Develop Definitions, Goals, Priorities, Theory of Action, + Policy Options
SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
Board Discussion
How should staff prioritize the three policy goals when developing options to share with the Board on November 18, 2019?
37
40
● Current choice system has not significantly reversed the trend of racial isolation and the concentration of historically underserved students in the same school
● Concerns about lack of: transparency, accessibility, predictability and simplicity
● Choice system seen as increasing inequity
● Concerns about the effectiveness and fairness of the CTIP preference
● Attendance areas have not changed despite demographic shifts in the City
● Families traveling across the City to attend school increases congestion, can contribute to tardiness and truancy, and is a barrier to ensuring strong community connections to local schools
WHY Board wants to develop a new student assignment system
41
● Initiate a process to develop a new student assignment system, focusing on elementary schools
● Recommend concrete, measurable definitions for: quality schools, equitable access, diversity, integrated schools, neighborhood schools
● Prioritize goals for student assignment and confirm the theory of action
● Model and present different options, indicating how well each model meets the Board’s goals for student assignment
● Support extensive community outreach
● Develop policy recommendations and an implementation plan
● Analyze transportation needs and plans
WHAT Board Resolution 189-25A1 calls on staff to do
43
Community Engagement
Policy Development Timeline
Fall 2019 Spring 2020 June 2020 Fall 20212020-21 SY*
Board approves new student assignment policy
for elementary schools
Modify infrastructure to support new policy*
Launch enrollment for 2022-23 SY
Develop Definitions, Goals, Priorities, Theory
of Action, + Options
Gather input from community and develop recommendation
* Infrastructure development timeline may take longer depending on scale of change
44
November 18
Ad Hoc Committee Definitions, goals, priorities, theory of action, and options
(review proposals and provide feedback)
December 3
Committee of the Whole
Staff Recommendation: Definitions, goals, priorities, theory of action,
options, and community engagement plan
Action: Green light to launch community engagement
September 16
Ad Hoc Committee Potential policy goals and priorities (discussed and
provided feedback)
October 21
Ad Hoc Committee on Student Assignment
Quality schools and equitable access. Policy
goals and priorities. (Discuss and provide feedback)
Fall 2019
Objective: Develop Definitions, Goals, Priorities, Theory of Action, + Policy Options
45
Objective: Gather input from community and develop policy recommendation
Spring 2020
April 20
Ad Hoc Committee on Student Assignment
Review draft policy recommendation and provide
feedbackMay 18
Ad Hoc Committee on Student Assignment
Review draft policy recommendation and provide
feedback
Action: Green light on recommendation for First
Reading
January and February
Community WorkshopsShare (definitions, goals,
priorities, theory of action, and options) and listen to understand concerns and
aspirations March 16
Ad Hoc Committee on Student Assignment
Review feedback from Community Workshops and
consider potential modifications to reflect
concerns and aspirations
46
Objective: Board approves new student assignment policy for elementary schools
June 2020
June 23
Regular Board of Education Meeting
Second Reading and Action
June 9
Regular Board of Education Meeting
First Reading
June 15
Ad Hoc Committee on Student Assignment
Review First Reading
How and Why We’ll Engage the Community48
IAP2 Spectrum of
Public Participation
Inform Consult Involve
Goal To provide balanced and objective information in a timely manner
To obtain feedback on analysis, issues, alternatives, and decisions.
To work with the community to make sure that concerns and aspirations are
considered and understood.
Promise to the Public
“We will keep you informed” “We will listen to and acknowledge your concerns”
“We will work with you to ensure your concerns and aspirations are directly
reflected in the decisions made.”
Engagement Strategies
● Website● Email Newsletter● Newspaper Op-Eds
● Public Comment○ Ad Hoc Committee Meetings○ Board Meetings
● Focus Groups with LEAD, Principals, Teachers, and District Advisory Bodies (October - December)
● Online Survey● Town Halls x 5 ( May)
● Community Workshops x 12(January - February)
Current Student Assignment System● Video showing how students are currently assigned to school● Board Policy governing current system● Interactive highlights of March 2019 school offers
● Annual Enrollment Highlights (2012-2019)
Resolution 189-25A1 (Approved December 11, 2018)
Recent Presentations to the Board about Resolution 189-25A1● May 13, 2019
○ (African American student recruitment @ Lowell and RASOTA, marketing for PITCH schools, Gen Ed transportation, revised policy development timeline)
● April 15, 2019 ○ (Case studies from other districts, elementary school attendance area boundaries, next steps for policy development)
● March 18, 2019 ○ (Round 1 application results, update on online application, policy development process and timeline)
● December 4, 2018 ○ (Committee of the Whole discussion of Resolution 189-25A1)
● www.sfusd.edu/adhoccommittee
49Supporting Materials
Feedback on Resolution 189-25A1 from District Advisory Bodies● Advisory Councils’ joint considerations on Resolution 189-25A1● AAPAC Bayview School Portfolio feedback● Community Advisory Committee (CAC) on Special Education● PAC’s Top 5 Findings
50Supporting Materials (Continued)
1
SFUSD Graduate Profile
RESULTS FOR STUDENTS
CONTENT KNOWLEDGE
Mastery of the core knowledge,
critical thinking skills,and
competencies outlined by the
Common Core State Standards
(CCSS).
CAREER AND LIFE SKILLS
The knowledge, skills, and
experience to navigate the “real
world” and solve problems that
arise in everyday life and in the
workplace.
GLOBAL, LOCAL, AND
DIGITAL IDENTITY
The ability to navigate and
engage in a 21st century global
society that is more inclusive
and interconnected.
LEADERSHIP, EMPATHY, AND
COLLABORATION
Strong interpersonal skills and
the ability to positively
influence and collaborate with
others.
CREATIVITY
The freedom, confidence, and
ability to express their unique
selves.
SENSE OF PURPOSE & SELF
Our graduates will see
themselves as filled with
purpose and value.
2 3
4 5 6