archive.acoe.orgarchive.acoe.org/Board/Agendas/2013-2014/Agenda-2013.09.10.16.0… · Times indicated are estimates and may change at the Board's discretion. ALAMEDA COUNTY BOARD

Times indicated are estimates and may change at the Board's discretion.

ALAMEDA COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION

AGENDA: VOL. XXVIII, NO. 04

CLOSED SESSION: Appeals: September 10, 2013 – 4:00 p.m. OPEN SESSION: Regular Board Meeting: September 10, 2013 – 6:30 p.m.

MEETING LOCATION:

313 W. Winton Avenue Hayward, CA 94544

510-887-0152 www.acoe.org

CALL TO ORDER: Time: p.m. ROLL CALL: President Rivera Vice-President McWilson _____ Trustee Berrick Trustee Knowles _____ Trustee McDonald _____ Trustee Sims Trustee Cerrato _____

CLOSED SESSION

1. Interdistrict Appeals: The Board will hear and take action on the following interdistrict appeals:

− 25-IF-13/14 – West Contra Costa USD to Alameda USD

− 30-YR-13/14 – Hayward USD to CVUSD

− 31-HF-13/14 San Lorenzo USD to San Leandro USD

− 32-BG-13/14 – San Lorenzo to Castro Valley USD

These matters will be heard in closed session.(Att. 1)

MOTION: SECOND:

AYES: NOES: ABST:

ACTION

BREAK Board and public can review instructional materials and textbooks pertinent to Item #6.

INFORMATION

Any member of the public may comment on agenda items, as each item is presented. Individuals wishing to address the Board need to complete a Speaker Card located at the entrance to the meeting room and provide it to the recording

secretary prior to the start of the meeting. Speakers are asked to limit their comments to two minutes each, and the Board President may limit the amount of discussion time for any one agenda item.

SALUTE TO THE FLAG:

Pledge of Allegiance

http://www.acoe.org/

ACBE Regular Meeting Agenda September 10, 2013 Page 2

ITEM

DESCRIPTION SUPERINTENDENT'S RECOMMENDATION


MISSION STATEMENT:

Provide, promote and support leadership and service to ensure the success of Every Child…in Every School… Every Day!

2. Public Comments [as close to 7:15 p.m. as possible]

Only on items not listed on the agenda. This part of the meeting provides an opportunity for the public to address the Board of Education on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Comments are welcome; however, the Board is prohibited by law from having a discussion with the speaker(s) during this segment of the meeting. Board members may respond briefly, refer an item to staff, or ask clarifying questions. Individuals wishing to address the Board need to complete a Speaker Card located at the entrance to the meeting room and provide it to the recording secretary prior to the start of the meeting. Speakers are asked to limit their comments to two minutes each, and the Board President may limit the amount of comment and discussion time.

INFORMATION

3. Common Core Staff report on the transition to Common Core standard.

INFORMATION

4. Determination Hearing on Legacies of Excellence Denial Appeal

A. The Board will receive an Evaluation

Summary Report from ACOE Charter School Review Team regarding their evaluation and possible actions. (Att. 2)

B. The Board will take action to either Approve or Deny the petition appeal for Legacies of Excellence.

MOTION: SECOND:

AYES: NOES: ABST:

INFORMATION/ ACTION

5. Consent Agenda – General Matters: A. Minutes of the August 27,

2013 Board Meeting

B. Public Education Service Award (PESA) for Dennis Byas

C. Temporary County

A. Board will consider approval of the Minutes

from the August 27, 2013 Reorganization Meeting. (Att. 3)

B. Consider approval of a PESA for Dennis Byas in appreciation of his 23 years of service as an administrator. (Att. 4)

C. Board will take action regarding approving issuance of Temporary County Certificates.

ACTION


ITEM



Certificates (Att. 5)

MOTION: SECOND:

AYES: NOES: ABST:

6. Public Hearing on Resolution No. 1948 Sufficient Textbooks and Instructional Materials

A. The Board will hold a public hearing regarding the sufficiency of textbooks and instructional materials.

Open Public Hearing

MOTION: SECOND:

AYES: NOES: ABST:

B. The Board will take comments from the petitioner(s)/proponent(s)/opponent(s) of proposed textbooks and instructional materials.

Close Public Hearing

MOTION: SECOND:

AYES: NOES: ABST:

C. The Board will consider approval of Resolution No. 1948 that certifies the sufficiency of standards aligned instructional materials and that all grade 9 – 12 instructional materials are aligned to California’s rigorous content standards for the particular subject area taught. (Att. 6)

MOTION: SECOND:

AYES: NOES: ABST:

INFORMATION/ ACTION

7. Policy and Legislation Committee Report

The Board will review and consider taking action on the following Board Bylaws for the SECOND READING:

− BB 9110 Terms of Office (Att. 7) − BB 9140 Board Representatives (Att. 8)

MOTION: SECOND:

AYES: NOES: ABST:

INFORMATION/ ACTION

8. Items from the Board Board members will discuss the status of their activities and possible topics of interest to the Board and the general public.

INFORMATION

9. President’s Report The President will discuss the status of his activities and possible topics of interest to the Board and the general public.

INFORMATION


ITEM



10. Items from the Secretary The Superintendent, as the Secretary to the Board, will present topics of interest to the Board and the general public. Local Control Funding Formula

Workshop – September 19, 2013 Teacher of the Year – October 3, 2013 Reflection on API scores (Att. 9) District Financial Report & New Role of

the County Office/ Superintendent

INFORMATION

11. Adjournment in the memory of Roy Nakadegawa

Adjourn the meeting (Time: ________p.m.) Visit www.acoe.org/board to view live webcasts of regular Board Meetings.

Next Meeting: Regular Meeting October 8, 2013

at 6:30 p.m.

All materials related to an item on this Agenda distributed to the Board of Education within 24 hours of the meeting are available for public inspection at the front desk of the Alameda County Office of Education at 313 W. Winton Avenue, Hayward, California at the time they are distributed. For inquiries, please contact the Superintendent’s Office at 510-670-4145.

http://www.acoe.org/board

MG/kk

Memorandum No: 11083 Meeting Date: September 10, 2013 TO: Alameda County Board of Education FROM: Melinda Giannes, Community & Legal Liaison, Child Welfare &

Attendance RE: Interdistrict Transfer Appeals Background Interdistrict transfer appeal requests from the following:

− 25-IF-13/14 – West Contra Costa USD to Alameda USD − 30-YR-13/14 – Hayward USD to Castro Valley USD − 31-HF-13/14 San Lorenzo USD to San Leandro USD − 32-BG-13/14 – San Lorenzo to Castro Valley USD

Action Requested Closed session hearings. Attachment Appellate application documents. (Att. 1)

Memorandum No: 11084 Meeting Date: September 10, 2013 TO: Alameda County Board of Education FROM: Sheila Jordan, Superintendent

[Jamie Marantz, Executive Director, Core Learning & Ingrid Roberson, Professional Expert, Assessment & Accountability]

RE: Common Core State Standards Implementation Background: In 2009, the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA) committed to developing a set of standards that would help prepare students for success in career and college. The Common Core State Standards Initiative is a voluntary, state-led effort coordinated by the CCSSO and NGA to establish clear and consistent education standards. On August 2, 2010, the California State Board of Education voted unanimously to adopt the CCSS. (Since 2010, 45 states have adopted the same standards for English and math.) In 2012, Alameda County Office of Education created the Core Learning Department, charged with the responsibility of supporting the awareness of, transition to and implementation of CCSS throughout Alameda in both Literacy and Mathematics. This presentation will provide:

1) Background on the Common Core State Standards 2) Update on the highlights from our previous work of supporting CCSS implementation in

member districts and schools

3) Plans for the 2013-2014 school year to continue to support CCSS implementation in Alameda County public schools

Action Requested: Information only. Attachments: None.

TK/kk

Memorandum No: 11085 Meeting Date: September 10, 2013 TO: Alameda County Board of Education FROM: Teresa Kapellas, Executive Director, Administrative Services RE: Determination Hearing – Legacies of Excellence Charter School – Appeal

from District Denial of New Charter Petition Background: The Alameda County Office of Education (ACOE) began its review of the charter school petition on July 15, 2013, after determining that the submitted appeal package was complete. A public hearing was held on August 13, 2013, in accordance with the Education Code’s provisions on charter schools, to consider the level of support for the petition by teachers, other employees, parents and the community. The ACOE Charter School Review Team reviewed the petition in detail, using a checklist based on elements and affirmations that are required under the Education Code. A copy of the staff’s Evaluation Summary Report was sent to the Petitioner, and forwarded to you for your reference. Action Requested: That the Board takes appropriate action to either approve or deny the petition for a new charter Legacies of Excellence Charter School. Sample motions are included. Attachments: Charter School Evaluation Summary Report by the ACOE Review Team (Att. 2)

CHARTER SCHOOL EVALUATION SUMMARY REPORT FOR Legacies of Excellence Charter School Appeal from District Denial of New Charter Petition Submitted July 8, 2013; completed July 15, 2013 Public Hearing held August 13, 2013 Charter Petition on Appeal - E.C. 47605 (j) (1) ACOE Charter Review Team: Education Services: Cynthia Medina, Chris Boynton Business Services: Roland Tom, Gail Greely Human Resources: Movetia Salter

Legacies of Excellence Charter School September 10, 2013

Page 1

ANALYSIS SUMMARY The Alameda County Office of Education’s Charter School Review Team completed a thorough review and analysis of the educational, operational, and financial information contained in the charter renewal petition appeal of Legacies of Excellence Charter School (“Legacies”). The petition was reviewed in 20 areas, with specific criteria in each element. Below are the rating results.

Criteria that Exceed Required Standard

Criteria that Meet Required Standard

Criteria that Fail to Meet Required Standard

0 13 8 The Review Team found the charter renewal petition did not contain reasonably comprehensive descriptions in several of the required areas. It is clear from the history and the petition itself that the petitioners are dedicated to serving middle school students who face significant barriers to learning. Their concept for combining academic subjects with elements of sustainable agriculture and promoting social-emotional health is innovative. And they have brought together a variety of supporters and community resources to promote the idea for the school. However, the plan for the charter school remains under-developed. The educational program was not well-developed and did not contain sufficient supports and strategies for “at risk” students, leading the Review Team to find that it was an unsound educational program for the students to be served. Because several areas of the educational program and the financial plan are incomplete, the Review Team also found that the petitioners are demonstrably unlikely to successfully implement the program set forth in the petition. Staff’s Petition Review Checklist, included as Appendix A, contains a detailed analysis of each Element/Section, articulating the strengths and weaknesses of the charter school’s proposal. The team also reviewed the report of the Oakland Unified School District (“OUSD”) upon which the denial of the Legacies charter was based, and the response of Legacies. A table summarizing issues raised by OUSD, Legacies’s responses, and ACOE staff conclusions is included as Appendix B. The petition document met the minimum criteria in the following areas:

Government Structure Employee Qualifications Health and Safety Admission Requirements Annual Financial Audits Staff Retirement System Attendance Alternatives Description of Employee Rights Dispute Resolution Process Labor Relations Closure Procedures Impact Statement Facilities

The petition document did not meet the minimum criteria in the following areas:

Education Program Measurable Student Outcomes Student Progress Measurement Racial & Ethnic Balance Suspension and Expulsion Likelihood of Successful Implementation Financial Plan Special Education


Page 2

BACKGROUND The Alameda County Office of Education received a charter petition appeal from Legacies of Excellence Charter School, following denial of the petition by OUSD on January 9, 2013. Petitioners submitted an appeal to the Alameda County Board of Education (County Board) on July 8, 2013. On July 15, 2013, after Legacies submitted additional required information on its governing board (Form B in the charter appeal packet), ACOE Staff determined that the appeal was complete and Staff Charter Review Team was formed. A public hearing was held in this matter on August 13, 2013. At the time of the public hearing, Legacies provided additional information related to its status as a tax exempt non-profit corporation, and its lease for the facility it intends to occupy. Following the public hearing, the Review Team completed its review of the petition and additional information. A copy of this report was provided to Legacies prior to the determination hearing. Alameda County Board of Education’s Role Education Code Section 47605(j) provides the following process for appeal of a district’s denial of a charter petition:

(1) If the governing board of a school district denies a petition, the petitioner may elect to submit the petition for the establishment of a charter school to the county board of education. The county board of education shall review the petition pursuant to subdivision (b). (Emphasis added.)

Education Code Section 47605(b), describing the standard and process for review of charter school petitions, requires the County Board to:

Hold a public hearing within 30 days on the provisions of the charter and consider the level of support for the petition.

Determine whether the petition document that has been denied by the District meets the established criteria.

Not deny a petition for the establishment of a charter school unless it makes written factual findings, setting forth specific facts to support one or more of the following:

o The charter school presents an unsound educational program for the pupils to be enrolled in the charter school.

o The petitioners are demonstrably unlikely to successfully implement the program set forth in the petition.

o The petition does not contain the number of signatures required by subdivision (a). (This requirement does not apply to charter renewals, per Title 5 California Code of Regulations §11966.5(b) (2) (A).)

o The petition does not contain an affirmation of each of the conditions described in subdivision (d).

o The petition does not contain reasonably comprehensive descriptions of the required content in subsections A-P.

Review Process It is our expectation that when a petitioner submits a petition on appeal, that they have submitted a plan they believe can be successfully implemented. Education Code Section 47605(b) outlines the requirements necessary to create a sustainable school. The appeal process, as established by law, is one that allows staff to evaluate the substance of the petition document in order to determine whether the petition stands on its own merit. The Alameda County Office of Education (ACOE) believes that quality authorizing includes a rigorous, comprehensive application process that follows fair procedures and clear criteria. Our review team includes


Page 3

staff members with expertise in various areas in order to provide a thorough evaluation. This review is conducted in a systematic, unbiased manner through a comprehensive checklist which provides uniformity in charter petition evaluations. Staff discusses their results and determines whether the petition document demonstrates a strong potential for establishing and operating a high quality charter school. FINDINGS OF FACT As noted during the public hearing, Legacies of Excellence’s charter petition has been under development since at least 2010 and has been submitted to Oakland’s Board of Education six times. It was withdrawn before the Oakland board’s decision five times. It is clear from the history and the petition itself that the petitioners are dedicated to serving middle school students who face significant barriers to learning. Their concept for combining academic subjects with elements of sustainable agriculture and promoting social-emotional health is innovative. And they have brought together a variety of supporters and community resources to promote the idea for the school. However, the Petition Review Team found that, despite the multiple iterations, the plan for the charter school remains under-developed. Content of the Charter Renewal Petition The Review Team found the current petition does not contain reasonably comprehensive descriptions in several areas under Education Code Section 47605(b) A-P requirements, and has failed to address the new requirement for measurable outcomes for all student subgroups. Below is a summary of the key findings. Education Program

o Describes “at risk” student population but no data on likely demographic or gender composition; no data on likely student levels of academic achievement, special education needs or English learners.

o Students included in “at risk” definition cover a broad range of challenges with no support for how the school’s approach can meet the disparate needs.

o Refers to using OUSD academic calendar, but provides no calendar with proposed professional development, summer program and student “induction” (as described in text); no calculation of days/minutes per year.

o No 5th grade curriculum described or referenced. o There is explicit reference to the use of Pacing Guides and OUSD textbooks. However, the

description and details for using these resources is too broadly stated and do not give enough clarity about how these will move students toward mastery of content and skill development – particularly students who have been unsuccessful or faced barriers to learning.

o Instructional design for core academics appears to be traditional, textbook-driven and not aligned with needs of students who have been unsuccessful in traditional settings.

Measurable Student Outcomes o Lack targets for student subgroups (as specifically required by charter law) o Measure fail to take into account likely student mobility o Targets not tied to individual learning plans (LIIEP)

Student Progress Measurement o Some program outcomes missing targets, i.e. unclear outcomes for analytical skills and

citizenship/social skills o No tie to individual learning plan (LIIEP) o No assessment calendar

Racial & Ethnic Balance o Recruitment plans in text and appendix inconsistent o No discussion of how recruitment of target population impacts demographic diversity o No discussion of possible gender disproportion


Page 4

Suspension and Expulsion o Proposes to adopt OUSD suspension/expulsion standards and procedures without describing

how this would be adapted to charter school setting or to school specifically recruiting students previously expelled by OUSD

Financial Plan o No start-up costs or documented revenue. o Expenditures lacking in detail; some expenditures appear unreasonably low, including

salaries, facilities costs and back-office support. o Pre-opening start-up costs not included, such as “interim team” described in text, recruitment

of students and staff, furniture, equipment, garden, etc. Some instructional materials included in first year operation budget.

o Budget assumptions do not include any EL students, although text assumes significant %; no Title III funding included.

Special Education o Assumes Legacies will be a “school within the district” for purposes of special education; no

supplement provided to discuss alternatives, such as contracting with another district or becoming an LEA within a charter SELPA

o No discussion of how special education integrates with individual student learning plans (LIIEP), “Class D” on master schedule, RTI, after-school program, ART and mental health services

Soundness of Educational Program for the Pupils to Be Enrolled There were many gaps in the program description, and inconsistencies within the text and between the text and appendices. It was difficult for the Review Team members to gain sufficient understanding to thoroughly evaluate the proposed educational program. Inconsistencies include:

References grade configurations 5-8 and 6-8 First year projected enrollment is stated variously as 80, 120 or 130 Focus of recruitment different between text and appendix Master schedule is not consistent with class periods described in text Description of special education program and plan for heterogeneous classrooms is

inconsistent with master scheduling showing a “Class D” for low-performing students Based on what is described in the current petition, the Review Team had concerns that the educational program is unsound for the population proposed to be served. This conclusion is based on the following evidence:

The instructional design is incoherent, with sustainable agriculture and career technical elements being confused with the EEI curriculum. EEI is supplemental and does not provide a substantial base for an educational program. It contains only two agricultural units – one for grade 6, and one for grade 8.

The Four Steps of Hotep program is not academic curriculum; not standards-based. It is a community program and leadership opportunity, but its integration into core academic curricula is not well-described or developed.

The use of an individual student education plan (LIIEP) is not well-described and is not consistent with use of OUSD pacing guides and standards-based textbooks, nor does the petition propose to use the LIIEP outcomes to measure the school’s performance.

Alternative curricula, materials and instructional strategies for students below grade level proficiency are not described.

The Review Team finds that additional development of these core ideas, applying research findings on effective strategies for students facing the challenges of this population, could produce a strong educational program, perhaps in partnership with Oakland Unified.


Page 5

Likelihood of Successful Implementation If the Legacies charter petition is approved on appeal, the charter will operate under the authority of Alameda County, with the expectation that the charter school will be able to successfully operate as an independent entity. This includes the expectations that the school will be take on full responsibility for special education as an LEA member of a SELPA and will be a direct funded charter responsible for compliance with federal program requirements, such as Titles I and III. These expectations were taken into consideration in reviewing the petition with respect to the likelihood of its success. The Review Team found, based on the documentation provided, that the school is demonstrably unlikely to successfully implement the program described in the charter renewal petition. Below is a summary of the key findings:

Facility is not well-described and ownership and leasing arrangements need clarification. No start-up costs or start-up revenue sources are confirmed. Hard copy budget includes

$200K in “factored receivables” for first few months of operation; soft copy financials include $510K in fundraising, with no back-up documentation.

Revocation of 501(c)(3) status and apparent loss of grant funding (in supporting documents) raise questions about availability of start-up funds.

Numerous inconsistencies within the charter text and between text and appendices indicate that program design hasn’t “settled” and limited collaboration has taken place among various authors.

Implementation plan is outdated and incomplete. Substantial turnover of governing board means board training and development may be

required. Successful start-up will require major effort for curriculum development (5th grade, induction

and agriculture curriculum integration) for which there is not an identified leader. Garden plans are not well-developed and feasibility of rooftop garden not discussed. Lack of understanding of career-technical education standards vs. Environmental Education

Initiative. Inclusion of Response to Intervention (RTI) is without integration with other programs, such

as induction, ART, Ripple Effects, “Class D” and after-school component. After-school and agriculture/culinary components are not staffed or funded (per budget

documents). Financial analysis (under per-LCFF formulas) was insufficient: no start up budget (revenue or

expenditures); cash flow schedule was incorrect; lack of expenditure detail. CONCLUSION As evident from the discussion above, the Review Team has serious concerns about the ability of the educational program design to serve the targeted population of students with significant academic and social-emotional needs. The Review Team also concluded that the petition content reflected insufficient understanding of charter school finance and operation to successfully implement the program. Should the County Board decide to approve the petition, substantial oversight would be necessary to ensure that the school is ready to open in fall 2014-2015. Numerous specific pre-opening and operating conditions, developed by ACOE Staff, should be required in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to be signed by all parties. At a minimum, recommended conditions would include submission of a revised charter petition that addresses the major deficiencies in the petition document; a revised financial plan, including a pre-opening start-up budget, annual budget, and multi-year projections using the State’s new funding formula; and a plan and signed agreements for implementation of a special education program. If the petitioners fail to meet any of the conditions in the MOU, the Charter Petition will be


Page 6

deemed not granted by the County Board on the grounds that implementation of all of the conditional requirements in full are necessary for the successful operation of the school. The Review Team also recommends that if the Board chooses to grant a charter for Legacies, that it be for a period of three (3) academic years only, rather than the usual five (5) years, to allow for a thorough review of the school’s success with the target population, which faces unique challenges. If the County Board approves the Legacies of Excellence Charter School, the term of the charter authorization, through June 30, 2017, should be included in the motion. Appendix A: Charter School Petition Review Checklist Appendix B: Summary of Issues Raised in OUSD Report / Legacies Response

ALAMEDA COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION CHARTER SCHOOL PETITION REVIEW CHECKLIST

X Initial Petition Renewal Petition

Proposed Charter School: Legacies of Excellence Charter School (Grades 5‐8) Proposed Location: East Oakland – Rudsdale St. between 80th and 81st

Petitioner Contact Information Denial Information Petition Review and Presentation Timelines

(Office Use Only)

Name District Denying Petition:

Petition Presented to ACOE

(Maximum of 180 days from denial)

Date July 8, 2013

Determined complete:

July 15, 2013

Public Hearing (30 days from

receipt)

Date Due

Date Held

Aug. 13, 2013

Decision by Board of Education

(60 days from receipt, may be extended 30 days if agreed by

petitioner(s) and ACOE)

Date Due Sept. 13, 2013

30 day extension to Oct. 13, 2013

NOT REQUESTED

Date of Board Decision Sept. 10, 2013

Robert Coleman

Oakland Unified Phone

510‐908‐4681

Address Date of Board Action:

201 E. 12th Street Oakland, CA 94606

January 9, 2013 Email

[email protected]

Area of Review Department(s) Responsible Meets or Fails Requirements

A. Education Program Education Services Fails

B. Measurable Student Outcomes Education Services Fails

C. Student Progress Measurement Education Services Fails

D. Government Structure Human Resources & Credentialing Meets

E. Employee Qualifications Human Resources (reviewed by ALL) Meets

F. Health and Safety Human Resources & Ed. Services (reviewed by ALL) Meets

G. Racial & Ethnic Balance Education Services (reviewed by ALL) Fails

H. Admissions Requirements Ed. Services/Human Resources (reviewed by ALL) Meets

I. Annual Financial Audits Business Services Meets

J. Suspension and Expulsion Ed. Services (reviewed by ALL) Fails

K. Staff Retirement System Human Resources & Business Services Meets

L. Attendance Alternatives Reviewed by ALL Meets

M. Description of Employee Rights Human Resources (reviewed by ALL) Meets

N. Dispute Resolution Process Business Services Meets

O. Labor Relations Human Resources (reviewed by ALL) Meets

P. Closure Procedures Business Services Meets

Likelihood that the Petitions Will be Able to Successfully Implement the Program of the Proposed Charter

Reviewed by ALL Fails

Supplemental Information

Financial Plan Business Services Fails

Impact Statement Reviewed by ALL Meets

Facilities Business Services Meets

Special Education Ed. Services & Sp. Education Fails

Independent Study (if applicable) SPAS & Ed. Services N/A

Printed by Alameda County Office of Education

Charter Petition Name: Legacies of Excellence Complete Petition Received: July 15, 2013

Legend: Required to be included in charter petition and/or Memorandum of Understanding

Strongly suggested to ensure that charter elements are reasonably comprehensive

1

Instructions to Review Committee: This checklist is designed to guide the review of charter school petitions. Throughout the evaluation, you are asked to rate the petitioner’s response as Exceeds, Meets, or Fails to Meet the criteria required for each specific area. The following rating definitions should be used to guide your assessment.

Exceeds Required Standard:

The response reflects a thorough understanding of key issues and indicates capacity to open and operate a quality charter school. The section addresses the topic with concise, specific and accurate information that shows thorough preparation, presenting a clear, realistic picture of how the school expects to implement and operate its program.

Meets Required Standard:

The response indicates solid preparation and grasp of key issues that would be considered reasonably comprehensive. Overall it contains many of the characteristics of a response that exceeds the required standard, although it may require additional specificity, support or elaboration in places.

Fails To Meet Required Standard:

The response addresses some of the selection criteria, but lacks meaningful detail and requires important additional information in order to be reasonably comprehensive. It demonstrates lack of preparation, is unclear, or otherwise raises substantial concerns about the petitioner’s understanding of the issue in concept and/or ability to implement or meet the requirement in practice.

At the end of each section, please elaborate, in the comment section, in the areas you rated as Fails to Meet, or Exceeds. Your comments are essential to understanding your assessment and will be used as part of the final analysis and report to the County Board.

Ed Code 47605 A | Education Program

Found on

page: Evaluation Criteria A‐P

Exceeds Required Standard

Meets Required Standard

Fails To Meet

Required Standard

8‐9 1. Targeted School Populations Age, grade levels and number of students X

Describe students whom the charter will attempt to educate X

23‐25 2. Attendance School year, academic calendar, number of school day and instructional minutes X

Attendance expectations and requirements X

9‐10 3. What it Means to be an Educated Person in The 21st Century

Objective of enabling pupils to become self‐motivated, competent, lifelong learners X

Clear list of general academic skills and qualities important for an educated person X

Clear list of general non‐academic skills and qualities important for an educated person X

10‐57 4. Description of How Learning Best Occurs Persuasive instructional design X Broad outline (not entire scope and sequence) of the curriculum content X Description of instructional approaches and strategies X Description of learning setting (e.g. traditional, home‐based, distance learning, etc.) X Proposed program strongly aligned to school's mission X Affirmation that, or description of, how curriculum aligned to California Content

Standards X

Outlines a plan or strategy to support students not meeting pupil outcomes X Instructional design or strategies based upon successful practice or research X App. C, E, G, H and L

Describes instructional strategies for special education, Insufficient English proficient students, etc.

X




2

Found on

page: Evaluation Criteria A‐P



Fails To Meet

Required Standard

N/A 5. Additional Requirements for Charter Schools Serving High School Student How Charter School will inform parents about the transferability of courses to other public

high schools

How Charter School will inform parents about the eligibility of courses to meet college entrance requirements

Education Program – Comments

If Exceeds Required Standard, include Strengths: If Fails to Meet Standard, include Concerns and/or Additional Questions:

Grades and number to be enrolled varies in text and appendices (5‐8 or 6‐8; 80, 120 or 130 enrolled).

Describes at risk student population but no data on likely demographic or gender composition; no data on likely student levels of academic achievement.

No explicit attendance expectation and requirements; no plan to support good attendance for students with history of truancy.

Students included in “at risk” definition cover a broad range of challenges with no support for how the school’s approach can meet the disparate needs.

Refers to OUSD calendar, but no calendar provided with PD, summer program and induction (as described in text), no calculation of days/minutes per year.

No 5th grade curricula described or referenced.

There is explicit reference to the use of Pacing Guides and OUSD textbooks. However, the description and details for using these resources is too broadly stated and do not give enough clarity about how these will move students toward mastery of content and skill development – particularly students who have been unsuccessful or faced barrier to learning.

Instructional design for core academics appears to be traditional, textbook‐driven and not aligned with needs of students who have been unsuccessful in traditional settings.

The Model described does not specifically link to exemplars of success. There is no connection to similar models of success.

The curriculum design which includes an “agriculture” focus is not fully detailed to include the rationale for this approach with the target population.

Research not provided for special elements, such as EEI, Ripple Effects or Art.

Instructional design is unclear with few examples. There are no lesson samples on garden education or Aggression Replacement Therapy or Ripple Effects.

Reference is made to using the EEI curriculum as a base for instruction. EEI consists of replacement curriculum meant to be substituted into a general curriculum ‐ not designed




3

to be the curriculum. Only two units (one for 6th grade; one for 8th grade) pertain to agriculture.

Agricultural instructional design does not include sufficient standards based curriculum. Culinary instructional design is missing.

Instructional design describes 80 minute blocks of time to allow for instruction, but those are not evident in the master schedule.

Math course outlined does not address the full scope of the math standards.

Refers to CCTE standards which begin only at the 7th grade.

Refers to agriculture as part of a STEM curriculum, but does not offer clear connections to science, engineering or technology.

Text refers to agriculture and science based lab and an agri‐science research project in appendices; not included.

Not clear how individualized learning will take place (on‐campus, off‐campus, technology‐assisted?).

Unclear how the sustainable agricultural science coupled with healthy living promote the stated Legacies mission “dedicated to providing a California standards‐based curriculum in a safe environment that focuses on academics and success” as those components do not seem to be linked with standards.

Ed Code 47605 B | Measurable Student Outcomes

Found on

page: Evaluation Criteria



Fails To Meet

Required Standard

57‐65

Pupil outcomes are measurable, i.e. specific assessments listed for each exit outcome, including statistically significant student sub‐groups

X

How pupil outcomes will address state content and performance standards in core academics

X

Clearly stated exit outcomes include acquisition of academic and non‐academic skills X Affirmation that "benchmark" skills and specific classroom‐level skills will be developed X Affirmation/description that exit outcomes will align to mission, curriculum and

assessments X

N/A Affirmation that college‐bound students wishing to attend California colleges or universities will have the opportunity to take courses that meet the “A–G” requirements

Lists school‐wide student performance goals students will achieve over a given period of time: Projected attendance levels, dropout percentage, graduation rate goals, etc.

X

Acknowledges that exit outcomes and performance goals may need to be modified over time

X

N/A If high school, graduation requirements defined and WASC accreditation addressed

Measurable Student Outcomes – Comments


No measures for student sub‐groups.

Some listed outcomes have no clear measurable targets.

No measures for student growth – important given likely high mobility of target population.




4

No measures for early years of school ‐ targets are for 3‐4 years out.

No measurable outcomes for agriculture, VAPA or technology.

No link to LIIEP, or individual goals within learning plan.

Ed Code 47605 C | Student Progress Measurement

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

66‐67 Assessments include multiple, valid and reliable measures using traditional/alternative tools

X

App. E Assessment tools include all required state and federal assessments (STAR, API, and AYP)

X

At least one assessment method or tool listed for each of the exit outcomes X Chosen assessments are appropriate for standards and skills they seek to measure X Affirmation/description of how assessments align to mission, exit outcomes, and

curriculum X

Describes minimal required performance level necessary to attain each standard X Outlines plan for collecting, analyzing/utilizing and reporting student/school

performance X

Student Progress Measurement ‐ Comments


Some measures just say “will meet curriculum”

Program outcomes missing targets, i.e. unclear outcomes for analytical skills and citizenship/social skills

No tie to LIIEP – individual learning plan

No assessment calendar

Ed Code 47605 D | Government Structure

Found on page: Evaluation Criteria



Fails To Meet

Required Standard

67‐74 Describes what role parents have in the governance and operation of the school X

App. B, D, J

Describes key features of governing structure (usually a board of directors) such as:

X

Compliance with Brown Act, Public Records Act and Conflict of Interest Policy X Size/composition of board, board committees and/or advisory councils X Board's scope of authority/responsibility X

Method for selecting initial board members X Board election/appointment and replacement X

Affirms future development of, or has set of, proposed bylaws, policies or similar documents

X

Initial governing board members identified by name or the process to be used to select them

X

Clear description of the legal status of the charter school X Outlines other important legal or operational relationships between school and

granting agency

X




5

Government Structure ‐ Comments


Some provisions of bylaws inconsistent with Brown Act.

No board term limits or provision for removal; no information on selection of current board members.

Petitions includes 3 different lists of board members; core team unclear.

Some inconsistency in description of board size; 5‐11 or 5‐13.

501(c)(3) status revoked; request for reinstatement pending.

Ed Code 47605 E | Employee Qualifications

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

75‐77 Identifies all key staff positions with the school X

App. I Describes specific key qualifications (knowledge, experience, education, certification,

etc.) X

Defines core, college preparatory teachers & affirms they will hold appropriate

Commission on Teacher Credentialing certificate, permit or other equivalent document as required by Law including the No Child Left Behind Act.

X

Identifies any non‐core, non‐college prep teaching positions staffed by non‐certified

teachers, along with required qualifications. X

Employee Qualifications – Comments


No mention of EL requirements for teachers.

No mention of who will provide credentials monitoring for teachers and credentialed administrators.

The employee qualifications make no mention of specialized training needed to work with the targeted population and their unique needs.

Qualifications include only principal and teachers (positions included in budget) although other positions are described in text.

Position descriptions are not customized to needs of student population or program features.

No staffing or qualifications for after‐school program (agriculture).

Ed Code 47605 F | Health and Safety

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

78‐81 Affirms that each employee will furnish the school with a criminal record summary X App. K Outlines specific health and safety practices addressing such key areas as:

Seismic safety (structural integrity and earthquake preparedness) X Natural disasters and emergencies X Immunizations, health screenings, administration of medications X




6

Tolerance for use of drugs and/or tobacco X Staff training on emergency and first aid response X

References accompanied by a detailed set of health and safety related policies/

procedures or the date by which they will be adopted and submitted to the ACOE X

Health and Safety ‐ Comments


No mention of the required training for mandated child abuse reporting.

Mandatory CPR/First Aid not in the job descriptions.

Safety plan and disaster plan are copied from other schools – not customized to site, location or staffing.

No reference to security needs for the specific population or the location across from elementary school.

Ed Code 47605 G | Racial & Ethnic Balance

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

83‐84 Lists specific practices/policies designed to attract a diverse applicant pool/enrollment:

X

Includes specific language access policy for attracting and achieving targeted racial and ethnic balance

X

Practices and policies appear likely to achieve targeted racial and ethnic balance X

Racial & Ethnic Balance – Comments


Recruitment plan in text and appendices are inconsistent – both lack detail on recruitment locations.

Lack of clarity about starting grades (5th, 6th or 5/6) impacts recruitment plan.

Not clear how students in specific “at risk” populations (target population for the program) will be recruited.

Given focus on specific types of at risk students, population may be disproportionately male and African‐American and Latino. Seeking a composition reflective of the county may be inconsistent with the school’s mission.

Segregating the “at risk” students as defined by the petition may not be sound educational practice.

Ed Code 47605 H | Admission Requirements

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

82‐83 Mandatory assurances regarding non‐discriminatory admission procedures X

N/A Admission preferences which are required for conversion charter schools, if applicable X

Clearly describes admissions requirements, including any preferences X




7

Proposed admissions and enrollment process and timeline, as well as procedures for

public random drawings, if necessary

X

Admission Requirements – Comments


Inconsistent statements on preference for OUSD – residents.

No enrollment timeline provided.

Unclear regarding mid‐year enrollment and “induction program”.

Ed Code 47605 I | Annual Financial Audits

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

86‐88 Procedure to select and retain independent auditor X Qualifications of independent auditor X App.F Audit will employ generally accepted accounting procedures X The manner in which the audit will be conducted X Scope and timing of audit, as well as required distribution of completed audit X Process for resolving audit exceptions and deficiencies to the satisfaction of the

Alameda County Office of Education X

Annual Financial Audits – Comments


Audit Exceptions needs to be received by the ACOE and resolved to the satisfaction of the COE.

Ed Code 47605 J | Suspension and Expulsion

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

84‐85 Detailed, step‐by‐step process by which student may be suspended or expelled X App. J Reference to a comprehensive set of student disciplinary policies X Reference homework policy for students suspended less than 5 days X Describe the expulsion appeal process X

Outlines or describes strong understanding of relevant laws protecting constitutional

rights of students, generally, and of disabled and other protected classes of students X

Policies balance students' rights to due process with responsibility to maintain a safe

learning environment X

Explains how ACOE may be involved in disciplinary matters X

Suspension and Expulsion – Comments


No description of student due process or specifics on offenses – just says they will adopt OUSD policy (which is not wholly applicable).

Lacks description of discipline system, which will be needed for target population.

Seems inconsistent to apply OUSD’s expulsion process and




8

standards in a school serving students who have been previously expelled by OUSD (according to the statement of target population).

Ed Code 47605 K | Staff Retirement System

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

78 Statement of whether staff will participate in STRS, PERS, or Social Security (if STRS,

then all teachers must participate)

X

Staff Retirement System – Comments


Ed Code 47605 L | Attendance Alternative

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

84 States that students may attend other schools or pursue an inter‐district transfer in

accordance with existing enrollment and transfer policies of their district or county of residence and/or description of other attendance alternatives

X

Attendance Alternatives – Comments


Ed Code 47605 M | Description of Employee Rights

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

78 States that collective bargaining contracts of ACOE will be controlling X

Whether and how staff may resume employment within the district or ACOE, if

applicable

X

Sick/vacation leave (ability to carry it over to and from charter school, if applicable) X

Whether staff will continue to earn service credit (tenure) in district or ACOE while at

charter school, if applicable X

Description of Employee Rights – Comments





9

Ed Code 47605 N | Dispute Resolution Process

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

81‐82 Outlines a simple process for the charter school and the Alameda County Office of

Education to settle disputes relating to the provisions of the charter

X

Outlines process by charter school will resolve internal complaints and disputes X

Dispute Resolution Process – Comments


Fails to reference Uniform Complaint Procedure.

Ed Code 47605 O | Labor Relations

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

78 States whether charter or ACOE will be employer for EERA purposes

X

N/A If Alameda County Office of Education is to be the employer, includes provisions

clarifying charter's role in collective bargaining process

Labor Relations – Comments


Ed Code 47605 P | Closure Procedures

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

88‐89 Outlines a description of the process to be used if the charter school closes

X

Process includes a final audit of the charter school, specific plans for disposition of all

net assets and liabilities, as well as for the maintenance and transfer of pupil records

X

Closure Procedures – Comments





10

Likelihood that the Petitions Will be Able to Successfully Implement the Program of the Proposed Charter

Evaluation Criteria Exceeds Required Standard


Fails To Meet

Required Standard

The Petition includes a thorough description of the education, work experience, credentials, degrees and certifications of the individuals comprising, or proposed to comprise, the directors, administrators and managers of the proposed charter school.

X

Likelihood that the Petition will be able to successfully implement the program of proposed charter – Comments


Charter was written prior to LCFF, so updated financial information using LCFF will be needed prior to opening in fall 2014.

Facility is not well‐described and ownership and leasing arrangements need clarification.

No start‐up costs or start‐up revenue sources are confirmed. Hard copy budget includes $200K in “factored receivables” for first few months of operation; soft copy financials include $510K in fundraising, with no back‐up documentation.

Numerous inconsistencies within the charter text and between text and appendices indicate that program design hasn’t “settled” and minimal collaboration has taken place among various authors. Inconsistencies include:

o Grade – 5‐8 or 6‐8 o First year projected enrollment – 80, 120 or 130 o Focus of recruitment o Enrollment preference o Staffing plan (Special Ed teacher, Clinical Director)o UC Davis partnership o Project‐based learning vs. textbooks o Master schedule – class periods o Tracking vs. Class D vs. special ed plan o Facility ownership vs. lease

Implementation plan is outdated and incomplete.

Substantial turnover of governing board means considerable training and development may be required.

Successful start‐up will require major effort for curriculum development (5th grade, induction and agriculture curriculum integration) for which there is not an identified leader.

Revocation of 501(c)(3) status and apparent loss of grant funding (in supporting documents), plus lack of PCSGP reference, raise questions about availability of start‐up funds.




11

REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

Financial Plan

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

After p. 92

Proposed first year operational budget

App. F • Start‐up costs X • Cash flow for first three years X

• Financial projections for first three years X Planning Assumptions X Number/types of students X Number of staff X Facilities needs X

Costs of all major items are identified and within reasonable market ranges X Revenue assumptions in line with state and federal funding guidelines X Revenue from “soft” sources less than 10% of ongoing operational costs X Timeline allows window for referenced grant applications to be submitted and funded X

Financial Plan – Comments


Charter petition pre‐dates passage of LCFF, so budget was based on General Purpose Entitlement and Categorical Block Grant. Charter should receive more revenue under LCFF.

Notes: Financial plan was not updated to show first year of operation as 2014‐2015. Staff analysis used 2013‐2014 plan as first year, and adjusted accordingly. Also, hard copy and soft copy (Excel) financial plans were inconsistent in some areas – particularly source of first year capital.

No start‐up costs listed; no reference to PCSGP start‐up grant.

Expenditures lacking in detail; unable to determine reasonableness (with some exceptions noted).

Charter shows private foundation grant of $500K and $10K fund raising. No supporting documentation provided.

Facilities discussion in text unclear regarding building status. No costs included to complete or prepare the building for student use.

Pre‐opening start‐up costs not included, such as “interim team” described in text, recruitment of students and staff, furniture, equipment, garden, etc. Some instructional materials included in first year operation budget.

Assumptions do not include any EL students, although text assumes significant %; no Title III funding included.

Budget assumptions appear to start with 6th grade only; text says grades will be 5th through 8th.

Facilities costs not consistent – lease document says $180,000 per year; budget says $120,000

Salaries appear low; estimated technology costs and back‐office provider costs are low.




12

Start‐Up Costs

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

After p. 92

Clearly identifies all major start‐up costs X

App.F Staffing X Facilities X Equipment and Supplies X Professional Services X Assumptions in line with overall school design plan X Identifies potential funding source X Timeline allows for grant and fundraising X

Start‐Up Costs – Comments


No pre‐opening start‐up costs provided.

Annual Operating Budget

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

After p. 92; App. F

Annual revenues and expenditures clearly identified by source X

Revenue assumptions closely related to applicable state and federal funding formulas X Expenditure assumptions reflect school design plan X Expenditure assumptions reflect market costs X “Soft” revenues not critical to solvency X Strong reserve or projected ending balance (the larger of 3% of expenditure or $25,000) X

If first year is not in balance, identifies solvency in future years and sources of capital

sufficient to cover deficits until the school year when the budget is projected to balance X

Expenditure for sufficient insurance to name district as also insured/hold harmless

agreement X

Expenditure sufficient for reasonably expected legal services X

Expenditure for Special Education excess costs consistent with current experience in the

school district/county X

Expenditure for facilities – if specific facilities not secured, reasonable projected cost X

Annual Operating Budget – Comments



No Special Ed revenue listed. No in‐lieu property taxes budgeted.

No details on expenditures in budget categories for Personal Services /Consultants and Rental, Leases and Repairs.

Private funding totaling $510K, needed in first year of operations. (Hard copy budget includes alternative




13

working capital source of $200k in “factored receivables”.)

Special education through OUSD assumed at $600 per ADA (elsewhere $800). Out year budgets don’t reflect shift to LEA status within a SELPA.

Costs appear low in multiple categories – especially with minimal detail provided: o Facilities (lease says $15,000 per month; budget

includes less) o Instructional materials o Food service o Salaries (all teachers at approx. $50K) o Equipment (inconsistent with planned STEM and

agriculture program elements)

Staffing does not include personnel for after‐school program or mental health; budget doesn’t include Special Education Teacher, Clinical Director and Executive Director positions identified in the text.

Cash Flow Analysis

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

After p. 92; App. F

Monthly projection of revenue receipts in line with local/state/federal funding disbursements

X

Expenditures projected by month and correspond with typical/reasonable schedules X

Show positive cash balance each month and/or identify sources of working capital X

Cash Flow Analysis – Comments


Cash flow schedule not consistent with LCFF model or previous charter funding schedule.

Assumes factoring receivables in first year for some pre‐opening costs – seems unlikely.

Unclear how start‐up grant and/or charter school revolving loan fund (referenced in text but not in financial plan) will factor into financials.

Long‐Term Plan

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

After p. 92; App. F

Projects revenues and expenditures for at least two additional years

X

Revenue assumptions based on reasonable potential growth in local, state and federal

revenues X




14

Revenue assumptions based on reasonable student growth projections X Reasonable cost‐of‐living and inflation/funding reduction assumptions X Annual fund balances are positive or sources of supplemental working capital are identified X

Long‐Term Plan ‐ Comments



Enrollment projections include large class in first year (120), adding 60 in each subsequent year; then maintenance of total enrollment despite likely mobility of targeted student population (attrition).

ADA figures year‐to‐year don’t add up properly. If starting with 114 ADA split between grades 5 and 6, adding 57 ADA 5th each year, then 2nd year grade configuration is misstated.

ADA Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5

Grade 5 57 57 57 57 57

Grade 6 57 57 57 57 57

Grade 7 57 57 57 57

Grade 8 57 57 57

Total 114 171 228 228 228

If starting with 114 Grade 6, adding 57 each year, then year 4 and 5 enrollment is overstated.

ADA Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5

Grade 6 114 57 57 57 57

Grade 7 114 57 57 57

Grade 8 114 57 57

Total 114 171 228 171 171

Revenue worksheet isn’t consistent with either scenario.

No evidence to support large initial class or ability to keep grade size constant.

Four teachers for 120 enrolled students generates a higher class size ratio than the 26 to 1 stated in the petition text.

Impact Statement

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

90 Provides estimated numbers of students anticipated to enroll X

Identifies whether charter will request to purchase support services from ACOE or

district X

Describes suggested processes and policies between charter and ACOE including: Process, activities and associated fees for oversight of charter X Content, processes, timelines, and evaluation criteria for annual review and site visits X Regular, ongoing fiscal and programmatic performance monitoring and reporting X Content, process, timelines and evaluation criteria for charter renewal X

N/A Proposed support service needs and suggested payments to ACOE or district for

services

Clearly drafted contract/agreement or reference to MOU X o Identify whether a request will be made for use of ACOE or district‐owned facilities X




15

o Reasonably detailed lease or occupation agreement for privately obtained facilities X Proposed legal status of school is identified X

Describes the manner in which administrative services of the charter school are to be

provided X

Identify whether school intends to manage risk independently or will seek to secure

coverage through the Alameda County Office of Education or other public agency X

Addresses potential civil liability effects, if any, upon the school and the ACOE X

Impact Statement – Comments


Lease agreement references terms in master lease, which is not provided, so terms are unknown.

Does not reference MOU or oversight fees.

No enrollment impact on district given; doesn’t identify likely district of residence for enrolled students.

Facilities

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

86‐67 Describe the types and potential location of facilities needed to operate the size

and scope of educational program proposed in the charter. X

N/A In the event a specific facility has not been secured, provide evidence of the type

and projected cost of the facilities that may be available in the location of the proposed charter school.

Are reasonable costs for the acquisition or leasing of facilities to house the

charter school reflected in budget (taking into account the facilities the charter school may be allocated under the provisions of Education Code section 47614)

X

Facilities – Comments


Description does not include map, site plan, classroom count or size.

Not clear if building is ready for student occupancy; no prep costs included in budget.

Ed Code 47641 | Special Education

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

41‐51 Petition specifies the means by which the charter school will comply with the

provisions of Education Code section 47641 X

Has consulted with a SELPA agency concerning Special Ed. Services X Has contacted the Alameda County Director of Special Ed. X

Discussed special education responsibilities of charter X Discussed application of SELPA policies X

Describes how special education services will be provided consistent with SELPA Plan

and/or policies and procedures X

Includes fiscal allocation plan X




16

Includes the process to be used to identify students who qualify for special education

programs and services, including X

Referral X Assessment X Instruction X Due Process X Agreements describing allocation of actual and excess costs X Charter fiscally responsible for fair share of any encroachment on general

funds X

The school's understanding of its responsibilities under law for special education pupils, and how the school intends to meet those responsibilities

X

Found on



Fails To Meet

Required Standard

If charter is LEA within SELPA N/A Notifies SELPA Director of intent prior to February 1

st of the preceding school year Provides current operating budget in accordance with Ed Code 42130 and 42131 Responsible for any legal fees relating to application and assurances process

Meets the terms of the “Agreement Regarding the Organization, Implementation,

Administration and Operation of SELPA”

Assurance Statement that Charter is fiscally responsible for fair share of any

encroachment on general funds

Petition includes the following assurances: The charter will comply with all provisions of IDEA X

No student will be denied admission based on disability or lack of available

services X

Will implement a Student Study Team process X

Any student potentially in need of Section 504 services will be the responsibility

of the charter school X

Overview of how special education funding and services will be provided by:

Petition/MOU describes the process for notifying district of residence and authorizing

school district when a special education student enrolls, becomes eligible, ineligible and/or leaves charter school

X

Charter School Alameda County Office of Education SELPA

Petition/MOU describes the transition to or from a district when a student with an IEP

enrolls in, or transfers out of, the charter school X

Special Education – Comments


Has discussed possible MOU with OUSD for first year Special Ed – no agreement at this time.

No evidence of contact with SELPA for future years, no plan for LEA status.

Most of Special Ed section is standard language.

Professional development for Special Ed in text, but not in professional development plan. Unclear if Special Ed teacher will be hired – in org chart but not budget narrative.

Special Ed section not customized to reflect program




17

features or student profiles – ART, Agriculture, Ripple Effects, RTI, etc.

INDEPENDENT STUDY | Requirements in this section apply to petitions proposing to utilize a non‐classroom based instructional strategy in the charter school.

Ed Code 47612.5, 51745 and 51747 | Independent Study

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

N/A The petition verifies that the K‐12 public school guidelines for independent study will be evident in the annual audit. 47612.5(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law and except to the extent inconsistent with this section and Section 47634.2, a charter school that provides independent study shall comply with Article 5.5 (commencing with Section 51745) of Chapter 5 of Part 28 and implementing regulations adopted there‐under.

The petition states that it will meet the requirement related to the ratio of ADA to FTE certificated employees as prescribed under education code 51745.6(a). The ratio of average daily attendance for independent study pupils 18 years of age or less to school district full‐time equivalent certificated employees responsible for independent study, calculated as specified by the State Department of Education, shall not exceed the equivalent ratio of pupils to full‐time certificated employees for all other education programs operated by the school district. The ratio of average daily attendance for independent study pupils 18 years of age or less to county office of education fulltime equivalent employees responsible for independent study, to be calculated in a manner prescribed by the State Department of Education, shall not exceed the equivalent ratio of pupils to full‐time certificated employees for all other educational programs operated by the high school or unified school district with the largest daily attendance of pupils in that county. The computation of those ratios.

The petition includes Written Policies required for eligibility to receive apportionments for Independent Study per E.C. 51747:

N/A The maximum length of time, by grade level and type of program that may elapse between the time an independent study assignment is made and the date by which the pupil must complete the assigned work.

The number of missed assignments that will be allowed before an evaluation is conducted to determine whether it is in the best interests of the pupil to remain in independent study, or whether he or she should return to the regular school program.

The requirement that a current written agreement for each pupil will be maintained in file, at a minimum, the following areas:

The manner, time, frequency, and place for submitting a pupil's assignments and for reporting his or her progress.

The objectives and methods of study for the pupil's work, and the methods utilized to evaluate that work.

The specific resources, including materials and personnel that will be made available to the pupil

Ed Code 47612.5, 51745 and 51747 | Independent Study | Continued

Found on




Fails To Meet

Required Standard

A statement of the policies adopted pursuant to subdivisions (a) and (b) regarding the maximum length of time allowed between the assignment and the completion of a pupil's assigned work, and the number of missed assignments allowed prior to an evaluation of whether or not the pupil should be allowed to continue in independent study.

The duration of the independent study agreement, including the beginning




18

N/A and ending dates for the pupil's participation in independent study under the agreement. No independent study agreement shall be valid for any period longer than one semester, or one‐half year for a school on a year‐round calendar.

A statement of the number of course credits, or, for the elementary grades, other measures of academic accomplishment appropriate to the agreement, to be earned by the pupil upon completion.

The inclusion of a statement in each independent study agreement that independent study is an optional educational alternative in which no pupil may be required to participate.

Each written agreement shall be signed, prior to the commencement of independent study, by the pupil, the pupil's parent, legal guardian, or caregiver, if the pupil is less than 18 years of age, the certificated employee who has been designated as having responsibility for the general supervision of independent study, and all persons who have direct responsibility for providing assistance to the pupil.

Petition acknowledges that independent study will be supervised by an appropriately credentialed teacher per 51747.5(a)

Petition acknowledges that school may claim apportionment credit for independent study only to the extent of the time value of pupil or student work products, as personally judged in each instance by a certified teacher per 51747.5(b).

Independent Study – Comments


Legacies of Excellence Charter Petition Determination Hearing September 10, 2013

Page 1

Summary of Issues in Renewal Proceeding:

OUSD Findings, Legacies of Excellence Response and ACOE Staff Findings

OUSD Board Major Findings (Resolution

1213‐0085)

Legacies of Excellence Response to OUSD

Board Findings

ACOE Staff Findings

The Petition’s educational program does not

include research and reasoning

supporting the design of the educational

program as specifically adapted to the

needs of the target population of high‐risk

youth.

We believe our educational program meets

the requirement of the targeted population of

our mission. In moving forward, we tried to

correct our wrongs and keep our identity

while presenting our Charter that clearly

meets the element requirements. Specifically,

we think it is unfair to say we meet

requirements as stated in Resolution No 1213‐

0013, then state we do not based on the same

information page 10.

Research is referenced with respect to English

language development and environmental

education. However, the petition does not

provide research or reasoning to support a

program for at risk youth that relies on

traditional curricula (OUSD pacing guides;

published textbooks) and daily schedule (8

period day; multiple teachers). There is also

no research provided on the effectiveness of

the separating at‐risk students on their own

campus, as opposed to a mixed campus or

mainstreamed approach.

The Petition lacks an implementation plan

describing key fundraising goals and

objectives which are needed to support the

multitude of academic and social

programs illustrated.

Our Charter never states that fundraising is

going to replace mandates of IDA for students

with IEPs.

The Legacies financial plan included estimated

funding for special education (assuming it

would be a “school within the district” for this

purpose). However, the budget information

did not include staffing or contracts for

counseling, behavioral supports, English

learners, agricultural education or the planned

after‐school program. The other major gap in

the financial plan was start‐up expenses.

There was no schedule of start‐up costs and

no documented funding to cover those costs.

The Petition lacks a clear plan for meeting the A clear plan for our Charter meeting the needs The charter petition contains a description of


Page 2

charter school’s obligations to

serve students eligible for special education.

of Special Education students with IEPs will

take an MOU with the District acting as our

SELPA, which only can be agreed upon after

the passing of a Charter.

the school’s obligations to serve students with

disabilities, based on an assumption that it

would be treated as a school within OUSD for

purposes of special education. However, it

remains unclear whether OUSD will enter into

an agreement to serve Legacies if it is

authorized by ACBofE. It does not appear that

Legacies has researched other options for

special education, such as becoming an LEA

within a charter SELPA. Petitioners were

informed that they could supplement the

petition submitted to OUSD with information

on how they would serve special education

students if authorized by ACBofE.

The Petition’s proposed governance structure

is under‐developed, with critical

documentation omitted or understated.

We believe our Governance Structure as

addressed in the Charter is complete and

critical documents are in place.

The description of the governance structure

meets minimum requirements. However,

some weaknesses were evident. The

organization’s 501(c)(3) status was revoked

for failure to file returns and has not yet been

reinstated. The bylaws are incomplete and, in

some areas, inconsistent with the Brown Act

and Political Reform Act. The board has

experienced turnover since the petition was

submitted to OUSD.

The Petition demonstrates an incomplete

understanding of fiscal realities,

particularly with respect to cash flow, and the

budget is not fully aligned with the

description of the educational program and

operations.

Our petition does not lack understanding of

fiscal responsibilities but our targeted

population realities need a SELPA in place that

we may re‐align our budget.

Financial plans were prepared under the pre‐

LCFF funding model and will need to be

revised. Documents submitted do not

accurately capture the cash flow model then

in effect. All revenue sources were not

accurately incorporated and some


Page 3

expenditure categories had insufficient detail

to assess reasonableness. Sufficient funds do

not appear to have been allocated to some

program features, including the after‐school

program, mental health services, and

agriculture program.

The Petition's plan for facilities is to lease a

building without clearly defining who

legally owns the property. Previous concerns

were raised due to conflict of

interest including who benefits from the

school's occupancy of the premise and

inconsistent reporting of the terms of the

lease.

Legacies of Excellence School is the

beneficiary of the building. Previous concerns

over conflict of interest did not exist and

clearly do not exist now. For leasing purposes,

the lease was not to take effect until the

building was occupied. In the previous Charter petition, the question of conflict of interest is

no more valid today than it was then. No laws

have been broken or compromised. We are

not similar in no way to the American Indian

Model. Furthermore, the Governing Board of

Legacies have never had to remove any

member because of conflict of interest or any

other violation of the law. Nor has the

Governing Board transferred the property to a

3rd Party Management Company. These are

the types of far‐reaching statements that are

carried on throughout the petition and it is

not in the spirit of fairness.

Documentation provided by petitioners shows

ownership of the facility transferred to

Spectrum Holdings, with a lease to Barbara

Cain, and a sublease to Legacies. Based on

this documentation, it appears that no

present or former member of the Legacies

board has a current financial interest in the

building. What remains is a concern that the

lease of this particular building does not

appear to have been an “arms length”

transaction based on consideration of all

available alternatives. Information about the

facility is limited; it is not clear that it is

suitable for the academic program and other

features, such as the proposed rooftop

garden.

The Petition lacks sufficient information in key

areas, including description of the

targeted population, special education plan,

financial resources and facility

acquisition. It requires further elaboration,

This generalization of our petition is far‐

reaching and not in the spirit of working

together for the benefit of the students.

The statutory standard for approval of a

charter requires “reasonably comprehensive

descriptions” of the mandated 16 elements of

the petition. The ACOE Charter Review Team

found some elements of the Legacies petition


Page 4

clarity, specificity, and detail in order

to be considered reasonably comprehensive

and in order to demonstrate a

proposal that is educationally sound and likely

to be implemented successfully.

to fall short of the content requirement,

including target population, instructional

program design, plan to achieve racial/ethnic

balance, suspension/expulsion, financial plan

and special education.

SJ/kk

Memorandum No: 11086 Meeting Date: September 10, 2013 TO: Alameda County Board of Education FROM: Sheila Jordan, Superintendent RE: Approval of Minutes Background The Board will receive and consider approval of minutes of the August 27, 2013 Board meeting. Action Requested Review and approve minutes of the August 27, 2013 Board meeting. Attachment Minutes of the August 27, 2013 Board meeting (Att. 3)


Meeting Location: Alameda County Office of Education 313 W Winton Avenue, Hayward, CA 94544

Unadopted Minutes of the Board Meeting of August 27, 2013

Vol. XXVIII No. 03

Presiding President Rivera called the meeting to order at 4:10 p.m. Roll Call Conducted by Superintendent Jordan:

Trustees Present: Joaquin Rivera, Aisha Knowles, Fred Sims, Eileen McDonald, Ken Berrick and Yvonne Cerrato Marlon McWilson (arrived at 4:15 p.m.)

Closed Session Board recessed to closed session. Reconvene President Rivera opened the meeting at 5:27 p.m. Flag Salute Led by V.P. McWilson. Item #4: Report from President Rivera on Board decisions made in closed session

Item #1: • Interdistrict Transfer Appeal: IDT #19-AR-13/14, IDT #20-ER-13/14 and

IDT #21-JR-13/14 San Lorenzo USD to Castro Valley USD The Board voted 4-3 to approve the appeal on the condition of improvement in attendance, grades, and behavior of the students. (Trustee Sims – No, Trustee Cerrato – No, Trustee McDonald – No, Trustee Berrick – Yes, Trustee Knowles – Yes, Trustee McWilson – Yes, Trustee Rivera – Yes).

Item #2: • Interdistrict Transfer Appeal: IDT #22-NW-13/14 Hayward USD to

Castro Valley USD The Board unanimously voted to deny the appeal (7-0).

Item #3: • Interdistrict Transfer Appeal: IDT # 23-DJ-12/13 Berkeley USD to

Oakland USD, Oakland accepted the transfer. Item not heard. The Board unanimously approved the appeal (7-0).

Item #5: Public Comments

None.

Item # 6: Consent Agenda – General Matters: A. Minutes of the July 9,

2013 Board Meeting

• Trustee McDonald moved to approve. • Trustee Cerrato seconded. • Unanimously approved (7-0).

Item #7: Items from the Board

• Trustee Cerrato passed. • Trustee McDonald assisted with the preparation of flowers for the

Fremont Flowers event. She thanked Supt. Jordan and ACOE staff for speedy response and follow-up to inquiries and concerns.

• Trustee Sims attended the Sister City Festival event in Union City along with Trustee McDonald. He also commented on the good work of the new receptionist for ACOE.

• Trustee Knowles attended Cherryland elementary’s first day of school. • V.P. McWilson passed. • Trustee Berrick reiterated Trustee Sims’ comment on the importance of

warm and friendly reception upon entry. He would like to discuss more

Unadopted Minutes of the A.C.O.E. Board Meeting 8/27/13 Page 2 of 2

in depth at a later meeting intensive intervention programs like those in Dessert Mountain Selpa.

Item # 8: President’s Report

• President Rivera attended the Biotech Partners Bravo event.

Item #9: Items from the Secretary

• Distributed to the Board the ACSBA/ Board Training flyer. Date has been set for Sept. 19th. She requested that Trustee McDonald provide a salad: Trustee McDonald agreed.

• She is working with OUSD & CDE to work-out the remaining issues around their audit.

• The Integrated Learning Summer Institute was a success. Adjournment President Rivera adjourned the meeting at 5:45 p.m.

__________________________________

Joaquin Rivera, Board President

__________________________________ Sheila Jordan, Board Secretary

SJ/kk

Memorandum No: 11087 Meeting Date: September 10, 2013 TO: Alameda County Board of Education FROM: Sheila Jordan, Superintendent RE: PESA for Dennis Byas Background: PESA request for Dennis Byas for his years of service in the San Lorenzo Unified School District. Action Requested: Requesting Board approval of the PESA. Attachments: PESA (Att. 4)

ALAMEDA COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION &

ALAMEDA COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS

Honor

Dennis Byas

We thank Dr. Byas for his exceptional leadership as superintendent of the San Lorenzo Unified School District for the past six years. During his tenure, San Lorenzo has significantly improved student attendance, achievement and college-attendance rates. His commitment to academic excellence is evident in the six years of continual improvement of API scores throughout the district, as well as the accomplishment of the Seal of Biliteracy award.

As Superintendent, Dr. Byas set the tone for fiscal responsibility while maintaining a focus on the needs of children. We commend his collaborative approach with board members to establish priorities in alignment with the district's mission to serve students. His ability to establish and communicate clear goals to the community resulted in the passage of a bond measure to increase school funding during turbulent financial times.

We salute Dr. Byas for his successful efforts to build a positive learning environment for all students. Through effective partnerships, Dr. Byas was able to reduce student suspensions and expulsions while expanding learning opportunities through California’s Linked Learning multiple pathways program. His innovative ideas also supported community partnerships and encouraged the use of green technology.

We honor Dr. Dennis Byas for his important leadership role in Alameda County.

Presented on September 24, 2013

Joaquin Rivera, President Sheila Jordan, Superintendent Alameda County Board of Education Alameda County Office of Education

MS/kk

Memorandum No: 11088 Meeting Date: September 10, 2013 TO: Alameda County Board of Education FROM: Movetia Salter, Chief Human Resources Officer RE: Temporary County Certificates Background Education codes 44332 and 4432.5 authorize the issuance of Temporary County Certificates and the payment of warrants to individuals who hold a TCC. This section was revised as a result of SB 148 (Bergeson) and again with AB 1139 (Woodruff) in 1991. The employer must make sure to the best of their ability that the individual meets the academic requirements for the permit prior to placing them in a position and submitting the application to the Commission. The County may issue a TCC, which allows the individual to serve in their school for up to a year while the application is being processed by the CTC. Action Requested The Board will take action regarding approving the issuance of the Temporary County Certificates. Attachment Temporary County Certificates issued YTD Temporary County Certificates issued August, 2013 (Att. 6)

Alameda County

Temporary County CertificatesAugust, 2013

Last, First District Credential Type codeZapata, Clarissa ALA Admin PDalton, John ALA CTE AME CTESperling, Osnat ALA ECSE Prelim PRitchie, Alexia ALB Admin CBaker, Kara ALB CLAD EKertesz, Matthew CV English GELAP EMasterson, Emily CV Music PFalkner, Lauren DUB CLAD EArora, Anjana G EMERY Chemistry PPillalamarri, Santha FRE Career Sub EClark, Sarah FRE Admin PStrommen, Catherine FRE Admin PMelsby, Amanda FRE Admin PSpeckels, Jeffrey FRE Admin PHernandez, Jose FRE Admin PMock, Jaclyn FRE Mult Subject PPappas, Michael FRE Admin PRuscher, Heidi FRE FLGS GELAP EColitz, Amy FRE Spanish GELAP EHong, Phyllis FRE Career Sub EPalos, Kristina FRE Admin PChaney-Aiello, Nathania FRE Admin PAlves, Ashley FRE M/S w/EL PPahwa, Indra FRE Career Sub EHonerkamp, John FRE CLAD CHollister, Joshua FRE English PBell-Bainivalu HAY M/M IChu, Shann HAY Admin. PCulberson, Raeshon HAY M/M POruz, Paul HAY Mult Subj. Intro English CCarmona, Edna HAY Admin. PGreub, Eston HAY Spanish BCLAD CGonsalves, Jennifer HAY Spanish,Health, CHightower-Guzman, Mistee LIV Admin. CCutter, Beth LIV Admin. PWatters, Cathreene NEW Admin PSmith, Jesse James NEW FLGS GELAP EEspinoza, Angelica NEW English w/EL STLee, Ji NEW M/M IStorm, Michael NEW Admin PHolbrook, Aaron NEW ITE Prelim w/EL PPembleton, Tracee NH Librarian EChristian, Kimberly NH Admin PBroomberg, Richard NH Admin. PGalbraith, Leah NH Music PGalbraith, Leah NH CLAD EFord, Jonathan NH M/M w/EL PBobadilla, Tina NH English,Soc. Sci. CPease, William NPS PE GELAP EDiaz, Marleny NPS Site Sup CDMarquez, Rebekah NPS Assoc. Permit CDVang, Bao NPS Assoc. Permit CDDavis, Mayumi NPS Mult Subject PDavis, Mayumi NPS DHH P

Alameda County

Temporary County CertificatesAugust, 2013

Braidi, Samantha NPS DHH STTimm, Rosa NPS DHH PIPCamillo, Alysia NPS Teacher Permit CDJones, Ian NPS DHH PJones, Ian NPS Mult Subj. w/EL PBurgin, Jason NPS PE GELAP EKuyrkendall, Timothy NPS PPS School Counseling WVHerger, Heather NPS DHH STIsrael, Erica NPS PPS School Psych WVRamanathan, Suthaharan NPS Soc. Sci. PRamanathan, Suthaharan NPS DHH Prelim PKeller, Warren NPS DHH PIP PIPFannin, Anrisa NPS Sub Permit EHyatt, Coral NPS Biology w/EL PBayanzay, Liluma NPS Mult Subj. STKuyrkendall, Charlene NPS DHH PIPBean, Stephanie NPS Sub Permit EMcCabe, Valerie NPS DHH PIPZambrano, Raisi OAK M/M PZambrano, Raisi OAK CLAD EWolfram, Kathryn OAK Mult Subj. PWolfram, Kathryn OAK CLAD EProzan, Anne OAK Admin. PPurcell, Brian OAK Admin PSaleski, Natasha OAK Mult Subj. BCLAD Span CRoberts, Angelique OAK M/M PPalin, Heather OAK Admin. pPalin, Heather OAK PE PBronte, Crystal OAK CLAD EWaldron, Kate OAK CLAD EDurio, Zonia OAK CLAD CKhalifa, Natalia OAK Prelim SS (directly filed) PSwanson-Hysell, Sarah OAK Prelim Mult w/EL (direct filed) PUshman, Evanne OAK Prelim Mult w/EL (direct filed) PCobb-Zunino, Constance OAK Mult Subj. STKhalifa, Natalia OAK CLAD EBarnett, Melanie OAK ECSE appeal PMcSweeney, Daniel PIED CLAD EHeller, Shannon PLEA ASL GELAP ETempleman, Ryan PLEA Admin. PSoldati, Kathy PLEA SMA English CDehl, Jessica PLEA Mult Subj. w/EL CCasanova, Audra SLD English STBellamy, Amy SLZ CLAD EMason, Morgan SLZ M/M PMason, Morgan SLZ CLAD EBarrett, Barbara SLZ CLAD E

2013/2014 Alameda County

Temporary County CertificatesThrough August, 2013

District Full Credential Intern

Prov. Intern Short Term Emergency Waiver Child Dev CTE/Adult

Mo. YTD Mo. YTD Mo. YTD Mo. YTD Mo. YTD Mo. YTD Mo. YTD Mo. YTD

ACOE

Alameda 2 2 1 1

Albany 1 2 1 2

Berkeley 1

Castro Valley 1 1 1 2

Dublin 1 1

Emery 1 1

Fremont 12 16 5 6

Hayward 6 6 1 1

Livermore 2 2

Mt. House

New Haven 5 7 2 2

Newark 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1

Oakland 13 27 1 1 1 5 9 0 2 0 1

Piedmont 1 1 2

Pleasanton 3 8 1 1

San Leandro 1 1 1

San Lorenzo 1 2 3 3

Sunol Glen

Non Public/Charters 7 7 4 4 3 3 4 5 2 3 4 5

Totals 57 86 2 3 4 4 6 7 25 34 2 5 4 6 1 1

SJ/kk

Memorandum No: 11089 Meeting Date: September 10, 2013 TO: Alameda County Board of Education FROM: Sheila Jordan, Superintendent RE: Annual Certification of Compliance and Resolution 1948 Regarding

Sufficiency of Instructional Materials Background Education Code Section 60119 was revised with the passage of AB831, Statutes of 2005, which took effect July 26, 2005. The revision requires all districts to hold a public hearing by the eighth week of the school year to make a determination through a resolution that every pupil has sufficient standards aligned instructional materials in the four core areas of English/Language Arts, mathematics, science and history/social science. Due to the alternative education environment of high mobility and low academic achievement, ACOE provides differentiated instruction through the use of standards based instructional materials along with standards aligned textbooks. The use of instructional materials is permitted by Education Code Section 60119. Education Code 60119 also allows for the use of novels and grammar books as acceptable in meeting the sufficiency of instructional materials requirement. The English/Language Arts program is standardized at all school sites through the Character Based Literacy (CBL) Project. Unlike the textbook adoption process in place for K – 8th grades, no State Board of Education process exists for grades 9 - 12. The state requires school districts adopt textbooks that are aligned with the content standards set by the state for grades 9 - 12. This adoption process provides the state with assurance that instructional materials are aligned to California’s rigorous content standards for the particular subject area taught. This item was tabled on the August 13, 2013 meeting to allow the public and Board additional time for viewing. Action Requested Hold a public hearing regarding the sufficiency of textbooks and instructional materials. After the public hearing reconvene the board meeting to vote on the following:

1. Pass and adopt a resolution that certifies the sufficiency of standards aligned instructional materials.

SJ/kk

2. Approval that all grade 9 – 12 instructional materials are aligned to California’s

rigorous content standards for the particular subject area taught. Discussion Staff will be available to answer questions regarding the instructional materials during the public hearing. Funding Source(s)/Fiscal Impact Textbooks and instructional materials that are aligned with state standards are purchased as per the Instructional Materials Funding Realignment Program (IMFRP) in Education Code Section 60422(b). Attachments: August 13, 2013 Public Hearing Notice 2013-14 Standards Aligned Curriculum 2012-13 Textbook Purchases 2013-14 Science Laboratory List Resolution No. 1948 (Att. 7)


ANNOUNCEMENT PUBLIC HEARING

September 10, 2013

In accordance with the CA Education Code Section 60119 and California Code of Regulations, Title 5, Section 9531(c), the Alameda County Board of Education will hold a public hearing at their regular Board meeting on August 13, 2013, at 6:30 p.m. at the Alameda County Office of Education. The hearing will provide the opportunity for input by parents, teachers, members of the community, and bargaining unit leaders on the review of textbooks and instructional materials.

Review of Textbooks and Instructional Materials

The review of materials is scheduled for the following dates and time:

Thursday, September 5, 2013 12:30 p.m. - 4:30 p.m.

Friday, September 6, 2013 12:30 p.m. - 4:30 p.m.

Monday, September 9, 2013 2:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m.

Tuesday, September 10, 2013 2:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m.

in Room S2 of the Conference Center at the Alameda County Office of Education which is located at 313 West Winton Avenue, Hayward, CA 94544. For further information, contact Adrian Kirk, Director of Student Programs and Services at 510-670-4590 or [email protected]. This public hearing notice is being posted on August 19, 2013, at the following locations: Alameda County Office of Education 313 West Winton Avenue, Hayward, CA 94544

Bridge Academy – Oakland 750 International Blvd, Oakland, CA 94606

Hayward Community School 680 West Tennyson, Hayward, CA 94544 William P. Burke Education Center 612 West A Street, Hayward, CA 94544 Fruitvale Academy 2648 International Boulevard, Oakland, CA 94601

mailto:[email protected]

2013-2014

Standards Aligned Curriculum

Reading/English/Language Arts

Textbooks and Instructional Materials

Title Grade Level Year Author or Publisher

Bronze: Prentice Hall Literature: Timeless Voices 7 2002 Prentice Hall

Copper: Prentice Hall Literature: Timeless Voices 6 2002 Prentice Hall

Gold: Prentice Hall Literature: Timeless Voices, 7th Ed. 9 2002 Prentice Hall

Literature: Gold Level 9-12 2002 Prentice Hall

Literature: Gold Level TE 9-12 2002 Prentice Hall

Literature: Platinum Level 9-12 2002 Prentice Hall

Literature: Platinum Level TE 9-12 2002 Prentice Hall

Literature: Silver Level 9-12 2002 Prentice Hall

Literature: Silver Level TE 9-12 2002 Prentice Hall

Platinum: Prentice Hall Literature: Timeless Voices, 7th Ed. 10 2002 Prentice Hall

Silver: Prentice Hall Literature: Timeless Voices, 7th Ed. 8 2002 Prentice Hall

Write Ahead: A Student Handbook for Writing and Learning 9-12 2004 Write Source

All Write Ahead: A Student Handbook for Writing and Learning 6-8 2003 Write Source

145th Street Stories 6-12 W. D. Myers

1984 9-12 G. Orwell

Acts of King Arthur and His Noble Knights, The 9-12 John Steinbeck

Adventures of Ulysses, The 9-12 Bernard Erslin

All's Quiet on the Western Front 9-12 E.M. Remarque

Angela's Ashes 9-12 F. McCourt

Animal Farm 9-12 George Orwell

Antigone 9-12 Sophocles

Autobiography of Miss Jane Pitman, The 6-12 Gaines

Bean Trees, The 6-12 B. Kingsolver

Beloved 9-12 T. Morrison

Bless Me, Ultima 6-12 R. Anaya

Blessing Way, The 9-12 T. Hillerman

Blue Skin of the Sea 6-12 G. Salisbury

Brave New World 9-12 A. Huxley

Breadwinner, The 7-12 Deborah Ellis

Breaking Through 7-12 F. Jimenez

Brian's Return 6-12 Gary Paulsen

Brian's Winter 6-12 Gary Paulsen

Bridge to Terabithia 6-12 K. Patterson

Bronx Masquerade 6-12 Nikki Grimes

Bud Not Buddy 6-12 C.P. Curtis

Buried Onions 9-12 Gary Soto

Call of the Wild and White Fang, The 6-12 Jack London

CBL Program

(MS) = Middle School Program Page 1

2013-2014




Cannery Row 9-12 J. Steinbeck

Child Called It, A 9-12 D. Pelzer

Child of the Owl 6-12 L. Yep

Children of the River 9-12 Linda Crew

Christmas Carol, A 9-12 Charles Dickens

Circuit, The 6-12 F. Jimenez

Color Purple, The 9-12 Alice Walker

Confessions of a Teenage Baboon 6-12 Paul Zindel

Contender, The 9-12 Robert Lipsyte

Convicted in the Womb 9-12 Carl Upchurch

Cry, the Beloved Country 9-12 Alan Paton

A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich 9-12 A. Solzhenitsyn

Dave at Night 6-12 Gail Carson Levine

Diary of a Young Girl, The 6-12 Anne Frank

Dogsong 6-12 Gary Paulsen

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde 9-12 R. L. Stevenson

Dragonwings 6-12 L. Yep

East Side Dreams 9-12 Art Rodriquez

Esperanza Rising 6-9 Pam Munoz Ryan

Exodus 9-12 Leon Uris

Fahrenheit 451 9-12 Ray Bradbury

Fallen Angerls 6-12 Walter Dean Myers

Farewell to Manzanaar 9-12 Jeanne W. Houston

Forged in Fire 6-9 Sharon Draper

Framed In Fire 6-9 David Patneaude

Freak the Mighty 6-12 Rodman Philbrick

Friedrich 9 - 12 Hans Peter Richter and Edite Kroll

Go Ask Alice 9-12 Anonymous

God of Small Things, The 9-12 A. Roy

Good Earth, The 9-12 Pearl S. Buck

Grapes of Wrath, The 9-12 J. Steinbeck

Great Gatsby, The 9-12 F. Scott Fitzgerald

Hamlet 9-12 William Shakespeare

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone 6-12 J.K. Rowling

Hatchet 6-12 Gary Paulsen

Heart is a Lonely Hunter, The 9-12 C. McCullers

CBL Program


http://www.amazon.com/Hans-Peter-Richter/e/B001H6O6YW/ref=sr_ntt_srch_lnk_1?qid=1311976962&sr=8-1

2013-2014




Heaven 9-12 Angela Johnson

Hero Ain't Noting But A Sandwich 6-12 A. Childress

Hiroshima 9-12 John Hershey

Hobbit, The 9-12 J.R. Tolkien

Holes 6-12 Louis Sacher

Hoops 9-12 Walter D. Myers

House of the Spirit 9-12 Isabel Allende

House on Mango Street, The 9-12 S. Cisneros

How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accents 9-12 Julia Alvarez

Hush 6-9 J. Woodson

I Am the Cheese 9-12 Robert Cormier

I Heard the Owl Call My Name 9-12 M. Craven

I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings 9-12 Maya Angelou

I Never Promised You a Rose Garden 9-12 H. Green

If You Come Softly 6-9 J. Woodson

In the Year of the Boar and Jackie Robinson 6-12 Bette Lord

Island of the Blue Dolphins, The 6-9 Scott O'Dell

Jacob Have I Loved 9-12 Katherine Paterson

Jesse 6-9 Gary Soto

Jitney 9-12 August Wilson

Joey Pigza Loses Control 6-9 Gary Soto

Joey Pigza Swallowed the Key 6-9 Jack Gantos

Joy Luck Club, The 9-12 Amy Tan

Julie of the Wolves 6-9 J.C. George

Julius Caesar 6-9 W. Shakespeare

Jungle Dogs 6-12 Graham Salisbury

Jungle, The 9-12 Upton Sinclair

Kindred 9-12 Octavia Butler

Left for Dead 9-12 Kevin O'Brien

Lesson Before Dying, A 9-12 E. Gaines

The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe 9 - 12 C. S. Lewis

Lone Ranger and Tonto Fist Fight in Heaven 9-12 Sherman Alexie

Long Valley, The 6-12 J. Steinbeck

Lord of the Flies 9-12 Wm. Golding

Macbeth 9-12 William Shakespeare

A Man Called Dave 9-12 D. Pelzer

CBL Program


2013-2014




Maniac Magee 6-9 Jerry Spinelli

Master Puppeteer, The 6-12 Katherine Paterson

Miracle's Boys 6-9 J. Woodson

Montana, 1948 9-12 L. Watson

My Brother Sam is Dead 6-12 James L. Collier

Nectar in a Sieve 9-12 K. Markandaya

Night 9-12 E. Weisel

Nightjohn 6-12 Gary Paulsen

Nothing but the Truth 6-9 Avi

Number the Stars 6-9 Lois Lowry

Odyssey, The 9-12 Homer

Of Mice and Men 9-12 J. Steinbeck

Old Man and the Sea, The 9-12 E. Hemingway

Outside Shot, The 9-12 W. D. Myers

Outsiders 7-12 S.E. Hinton

Paravana's Journey 6-9 Deborah Ellis

Parrot in the Oven 9-12 V. Martinez

Pearl, The 9-12 J. Steinbeck

Perfect Storm, The 9-12 Sebastian Junger

Picture of Dorian Gray, The 9-12 Oscar Wilde

Pigman, The 9-12 Paul Zindel

Pocho 9-12 Jose Villarreal

Power of One, The 9-12 B. Courtenay

Raisin in the Sun, A 9-12 L. Hansberry

Red Badge of Courage, The 7-12 Stephen Crane

Red Pony, The 7-12 John Steinbeck

Red Scarf Girl: A Memoir of the Cultural Revolution 9-12 Ji Li Jiang

Riding Freedom 6-12 Pam Munoz Ryan

Rifle, The 6-12 Gary Paulsen

River, The 6-12 Gary Paulsen

Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry 6-8 Mildred D. Taylor

Rumblefish 6-12 S. E. Hinton

Sarny 6-9 Gary Paulsen

Secret Garden, The 9-12 Frances H. Burnett

Seed Folks 6-9 Paul Fleischman

Shadow Spinner 6-9 Susan Fletcher

Siddhartha 9-12 Herman Hesse

CBL Program


http://www.barnesandnoble.com/c/mildred-d.-taylor

2013-2014




Sing Down the Moon 6-12 Scott O'Dell

Somewhere in the Darkness 6-12 W. D. Myers

Soldiers Play 9-12 August Wilson

Stranger in a Strange Land 9-12 Robert A. Heinlein

Stuck in Neutral 6-9 Terry Truman

Sula 9-12 Toni Morrison

Summer of My German Soldier 9-12 Brette Green

Surviving the Applewhites 6-12 Pam Munoz Ryan

Taste of Salt 6-9 Frances Temple

Teacup Full of Roses, A 9-12 Sharon Bell Mathis

Tent, The 6-12 Gary Paulsen

Things They Carried, The 9-12 Tim O'Brien

To Be Young, Gifted, and Black 9-12 L. Hansberry

To Kill a Mockingbird 9-12 Harper Lee

Tuck Everlasting 6-9 N. Babbitt

Tunes for Bears to Dance To 9-12 Robert Cormier

Two Old Women 9-12 V. Perris

Under the Blood Red Sun 6-12 Graham Salisbury

Watsons Go To Birmingham, The 6-12 C. P. Curtis

Where the Red Fern Grows 6-9 Wilson Rawls

Whirligig 9-12 Fleishman

Women of Brewster Place, The 9-12 G. Naylor

Wringer 6-12 Spinelli

Yearling, The 6-12 M. K. Rawlings

CBL Program


2013-2014 Standards Aligned Curriculum

English Learners Program

Longman Content Specific


Longman Social Studies 6-12 2006 Pearson

Longman Social Studies Workbook 6-12 2006 Pearson

Longman Science 6-12 2006 Pearson

Longman Science Workbook 6-12 2006 Pearson

Longman Mathematics 6-12 2005 Pearson

English Learners


All American Stories Level A Early 2006 Pearson

All American Stories Level B Intermediate 2006 Pearson

All American Stories Level C Early Adv 2006 Pearson

Academic Success for English Language Prof Text 2005 Pearson

Activity & Resource Book w/ Audio CD - Level 2 Early 2005 Pearson

Activity & Resource Book w/ Audio CD - Level 4 Advanced 2005 Pearson

Activity Resource Book w/ Audio CD Beginning 2005 Pearson

American English Level 2 CD rom Beg - Early 2005 Pearson

American English Level 3 Young Adult 2005 Pearson

American English Level 4 CD rom Young Adult 2005 Pearson

CD rom Level 1 - Longman English Interactive Beginning 2005 Pearson

CD rom Level 2 - Longman English Interactive Early 2005 Pearson

CD rom Level 3 - Longman English Interactive Intermediate 2005 Pearson

CD rom Level 4 - Longman English Interactive Early Adv 2005 Pearson

Keys to Learning Audio CD's Newcomer 2005 Pearson

Keys to Learning Teacher Edition w/ Tests Newcomer 2005 Pearson

Keys to Learning Transparencies Newcomer 2005 Pearson

Keys to Learning Workbook Newcomer 2005 Pearson

Longman English Level 1 w/ Audio Beginning 2005 Pearson

Longman English Level 3 w/ CD rom Intermediate 2005 Pearson

Shining Star Series Keys to Learning - Text Newcomer 2005 Pearson

English Learners Program Page 1



English Learners


Teaching Content to English Language Learners Prof Text 2005 Pearson

All New Easy True Stories Low-Beg 2004 Pearson

Audio CD's (4) - Level C Level C 2004 Pearson

Audio CD's (4) - Shining Star B Level B 2004 Pearson

Audio CD's (4) - Shining Star Level A Level A 2004 Pearson

Classroom Library - Level C Level C 2004 Pearson

Classroom Library - Shining Star B Level B 2004 Pearson

Classroom Library - Shining Star Level A Level A 2004 Pearson

Introductory CD Intro 2004 Pearson

Introductory Resources for Teachers Intro 2004 Pearson

Introductory Transparencies Intro 2004 Pearson

Level B Workbook - Shining Star B Level B 2004 Pearson

Level C Workbook - Shining Star Level C 2004 Pearson

Longman Dictionary of American English Young Adult 2004 Pearson

Resources for Teachers - Shining Star Level C 2004 Pearson

Resources for Teachers - Shining Star B Level B 2004 Pearson

Resources for Teachers - Shining Star Level A Level A 2004 Pearson

Shining Star Classroom Library Intro 2004 Pearson

Shining Star Level A Student Text Level A 2004 Pearson

Shining Star Level B Student Book -Text Level B 2004 Pearson

Shining Star Level C Student Book Level C 2004 Pearson

Shining Star Teachers Edition - Intro Intro 2004 Pearson

Shining Star Workbook - Intro Intro 2004 Pearson

Teacher's Edition - Shining Star C Level C 2004 Pearson

Teacher's Edition - Shining Star Level A Level A 2004 Pearson

Teacher's Edition - Shining Star Level B Level B 2004 Pearson

Transparencies - Level C Level C 2004 Pearson

Transparencies - Shining Star B Level B 2004 Pearson

Transparencies - Shining Star Level A Level A 2004 Pearson




English Learners


Workbook - Longman Dictionary of Amer Eng Young Adult 2004 Pearson

Workbook - Shining Star Level A Level A 2004 Pearson

Beyond True Stories Inter-High 2003 Pearson

Latin America Paperback Young Adult 2003 Pearson

Making it Happen Prof Text 2003 Pearson

Stories we Brought with US Early 2002 Pearson

Dictionary Mexican Paperback Young Adult 2000 Pearson

Even More True Stories Intermediate 2000 Pearson

Legend - Shining Start Text Levels:

Newcomer - beginning level in English proficiency for recent arrivals

Intro - beginning/review; basic vocabulary; introduces content area vocabulary

A - early

B - intermediate

C- early intermediate to advanced



Butler Academic Center

Mathematics/History-Social Science/Science

Mathematics


Algebra I Smith, Charles CA SE 8 2008 Pearson Learning Group

Math Intervention CA Student Study Guide Vol3A 4-7 2008 Glencoe/McGraw Hill



Math Intervention CA Student Study Guide Vol6B 4-7 2008 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Algebra 1 CA Edition 9-12 2008 Prentice Hall

Punchline Algebra Books A and B 2006

Numeracy Project 6-8 2005 ACOE

Just for the Fun of It II 6-9 2005

Algebra 1 California 8-12 2005 Coordination Group

Geometry 9-12 2005 AGS

Mathematics Concepts 9-12 2005 AGS

A Graphing Matter (Algebra) 6-9 2004

Algebra 9-12 2004 AGS

CAHSEE CD: AIMS (CAHSEE Math Prep) 9-12 2004

Looking at Geometry 6-9 2003

Geometry: Seeing, Doing, Understanding 9-12 2003

Algebra 2 9-12 2003 Glencoe McGraw Hill

Basic Math Skills 9-12 2003 AGS

Consumer Mathematics 9-12 2003 AGS

Cooperative Learning and Geometry - High School Activities 8-12 2002

Punchline Bridge to Algebra 2002


History/Social Studies


American History: Civil War to the Present 11 2003 Pearson AGS Globe

Civil War to Present 11 2003 AGS

US History 11 2003 AGS

World History 10 2004 AGS

Short Lessons in U.S. History 7-12 2004 Walch Publishers

Economics 12 2005 AGS

US Government 12 2005 AGS

U.S. History 2005 AGS

U.S. History, Independence to 1914 8 2006 Holt, Rinehart, and Winston

The American Vision Modern Times 2008 Glencoe McGraw Hill

World History 2008 Pearson AGS Globe

World History The Modern Era 2009 Prentice Hall

Butler Academic Center Page 1


Butler Academic Center


Science


Basic Science 6-9 2002 Steck Vaughn

Land Animals 6-9 2002 Steck Vaughn

Modern Biology 9-12 2002 Holt & Reinhart

Physical Science 6-9 2002 Steck Vaughn

Science Plus 2002

Water Animals 6-9 2002 Steck Vaughn

Biology An Everyday Experience 8-10 2003 McGraw Hill

Biology 2004 AGS

Biology TE 2004 AGS

Physical Science 2004 AGS

Reading in the Content Area: Science 7-12 2004 McGraw-Hill

Science Video "Human Machine 7-12 2004 National Geographic

Time Reading plus Science 7-12 2004 McGraw-Hill

Timed Reading plus Science Different Level #2 7-12 2004 McGraw-Hill

Physical Science 2005 AGS

Physical Science 8-10 2005 McGraw Hill

Physical Science (English & Spanish Editions) 9-12 2005 Holt Science & Technology

Science 9-12 2005 Pearson Education (Globe Fearon)

Science - Teacher 9-12 2005 Pearson Education (Globe Fearon)

Earth Science 6 2007 School Specialty Inc.

Butler Academic Center Page 2


CalSAFE Program


Mathematics





Geometry 9-12 2005 Pearson Learning Group





Algebra 9-12 2004 Pearson Learning Group


Algebra 2 9-12 2003 Glencoe


History/Social Science


World History: The Modern Era 9-12 2009 Pearson Learning Group

World History: The Modern Era 10 2009 Prentice Hall

World History 9-12 2008 Pearson Learning Group

The American Vision: Modern Times 11 2008 Glencoe

World History 10 2005 AGS

US History 11 2005 AGS


U.S. History 10-12 2005 Pearson Learning Group

U.S. Government 11-12 2005 Pearson Learning Group

The American Vision - Modern Times 11-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Economics 12 2005 Pearson Learning Group

Economics 12 2005 Steck-Vaughn

CalSAFE Program Page 1


CalSAFE Program


Science


Physical Science 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Physical Science 9-12 2004 AGS

Biology 9-12 2004 AGS

Biology TE 9-12 2004 AGS

Chemistry Concepts and Applications 9-12 2003 Glencoe

Biology: An Every Day Experience 9-12 2003 McGraw Hill

Health, Parenting, and Life Skills


Parenting: Rewards and Responsibilities 9-12 2007 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Parenting: Rewards and Responsibilities TE 9-12 2007 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Health 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Health 9-12 2000 Glencoe

Developing Child 9-12 2000 Glencoe

Foreign Language


Juntos Uno (Spanish) 8-12 2000 Prentice Hall

Paso a Paso (Spanish) 8-12 2000 Prentice Hall

GED Instructional Materials


Complete Pre-GED Preparation 10-12 2004 Steck - Vaughn

Complete GED Preparation Level II 10-12 2002 Steck - Vaughn

GED Complete Classroom Set Level I 10-12 2002 Steck - Vaughn

GED Instructional Materials


Language Arts, Reading GED Preparation Level II 10-12 2002 Steck - Vaughn

Language Arts, Writing, GED Preparation Level II 10-12 2002 Steck - Vaughn

Mathematics, GED Preparation Level I 10-12 2002 Steck - Vaughn

Mathematics, GED Preparation Level II 10-12 2002 Steck - Vaughn

Science, GED Preparation Level I 10-12 2002 Steck - Vaughn

Science, GED Preparation Level II 10-12 2002 Steck - Vaughn

Social Science, GED Preparation Level I 10-12 2002 Steck - Vaughn

Social Science, GED Preparation Level II 10-12 2002 Steck - Vaughn

The Essay, GED Preparation Level II 10-12 2002 Steck - Vaughn

CalSAFE Program Page 2


Camp Wilmont Sweeney Education Center


Mathematics




Pacemaker Algebra 1 9-12 2004 AGS


Basic Math Skills 9 2003 AGS

Life Skills Math 9 2003 AGS

Algebra 2 9-12 2003 Glencoe McGraw Hill

GED Mathematics


GED - Math 11-12 2002 Steck Vaughn

GED Math Exercise Book 11-12 2002 Steck Vaughn

Mathematics Workbook 11-12 2002 Steck Vaughn



World History The Modern Era 9-12 2009 Prentice Hall

The American Vision Modern Times 9-12 2008 Glencoe McGraw Hill

World History 9-12 2008 Pearson AGS Globe

Economics 12 2005 AGS

Economics - Student Workbook 12 2005 AGS

U.S. History 9-12 2005 AGS


US Government - Student Workbook 12 2005 AGS

Pacemaker US History 9-12 2004 AGS

American History Civil War to Present 9-12 2003 AGS

Pacemaker World History 9-12 2002 AGS

Camp Wilmont Sweeney Ed. Center Page 1


Camp Wilmont Sweeney Education Center


GED History/Social Science


GED Social Sciences Exercise Book 11-12 2002 Steck Vaughn

GED - Social Studies 11-12 2002 Steck Vaughn

Pre-GED Social Studies 11-12 2002 Steck Vaughn

Science


Physical Science 8-10 2005 McGraw Hill

Biology - Text 10 2004 AGS

Physical Science - Text 9 2004 AGS

Pacemaker General Science 9-12 2004 AGS

Biology An Everyday Experience 8-10 2003 McGraw Hill

GED Science


GED Science Exercise Book 11-12 2002 Steck Vaughn

GED Science 11-12 2002 Steck Vaughn

Pre-GED Science 11-12 2002 Steck Vaughn

Camp Wilmont Sweeney Ed. Center Page 2


Hayward Community School


Mathematics




Algebra: Concepts and Applications 8-10 2006 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Algebra Prerequisite Skills Remediation's & Intervention Tchr Guide 8-10 2006 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Algebra Prerequisite Skills Remediation's and Intervention 8-10 2006 Glencoe/McGraw Hill


Pre-Algebra 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Geometry - Resource CD 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Geometry - Teacher 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Pre-Algebra Resource CD 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Pre-Algebra - Teacher 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Pre-Algebra - Resource Teacher 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Pre-Algebra - Skills Practice 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Pre-Algebra - Workbook 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Pre-Algebra - Study Guide 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill


Algebra 2 - Resource CD 9-12 2003 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Algebra 2 - Teacher 9-12 2003 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Algebra 2 - Resource Workbook 9-12 2003 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Algebra 2 9-12 2003 Glencoe/McGraw Hill



Hayward Community School Page 1


Hayward Community School





Civics Today: Citizenship, Economics, and You 9-12 2008 Glencoe/McGraw Hill


The American Vision: Modern Times : Student Edition 9-12 2008 Glencoe/McGraw Hill


Discovering Our Past: Medieval and Early Modern Times,

Grade 7 California Student Edition (Hardbound) 7 2006 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Glencoe Discovering Our Past: The American Journey to

World War I, Grade 8 California Student Edition (Hardbound) 8 2006 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Glencoe World History 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill


World History Reading Essentials & Stdy Guide 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

World History Spanish Reading Essentials 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

American Odyssey: The 20th Century and Beyond 10-12 2004 Glencoe

Science


Human Body Systems 9-12 2002 Glencoe



Physical Science - Labs 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Physical Science - Resource 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Physical Science - Resource 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Physical Science - Student Workbooks 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Physical Science - Study Guide 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Physical Science - Study Guide 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Biology: An Everyday Experience 9-12 2003 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Biology: An Everyday Experience - Resource 9-12 2003 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Biology: An Everyday Experience - Resource Guide 9-12 2003 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Biology: An Everyday Experience - Teacher 9-12 2003 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Hayward Community School Page 2


Quest Academy


Mathematics


Math Inervention CA Student Study Guide, Vol. 2B 4-8 2009 Glencoe/McGraw-Hill






America's History: Land of Liberty Book 1 8-12 2008 Houghton Mifflin

America's History: Land of Liberty Book 2 8-12 2008 Houghton Mifflin

Mastering CA Math Standards workbook 6 2008 Glencoe/McGraw-Hill

Mastering CA Math Standards workbook 7 2008 Glencoe/McGraw-Hill

Math Intervention CA Teach Edition, Vol. 1 9-12 2008 Glencoe/McGraw-Hill





Algebra 2 with Trigonometry SE 10-12 2006 Pearson Learning Group

Algebra 2 with Trigonometry TE 10-12 2006 Pearson Learning Group

Geometry 9 2005 Pearson Learning Group

Geometry 7-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Geometry - Teacher 7-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill



Algebra 1 - Teacher 7-10 2004 Glencoe/McGraw Hill


Pre- Algebra Teacher Wraparound 7-10 2004 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Pre-Algebra 7-10 2004 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Pre-Algebra Practice Workbook 7-10 2004 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Pre-Algebra CD Student Work 7-10 2004 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Pre-Algebra Skills Practice 7-10 2004 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Pre-Algebra Teacher Resources 7-10 2004 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Quest Academy Page 1


Quest Academy




History of Our World: The Ancient World, Vol. I 7-12 2008 Houghton Mifflin Company

History of Our World: The Modern World, Vol. II 7-12 2008 Houghton Mifflin Company

American History-Land of Liberty -Book 1 11 2006 Steck-Vaughn

American History-Land of Liberty -Book 2 11 2006 Steck-Vaughn

American Odyssey Teacher Resource Set 10-12 2004 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

American Odyssey: The United States in the 20th Century 10-12 2004 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Interactive Tutor Self-Assessment 10-12 2004 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Civics Today: Citizenship, Econ and You 11-12 2003 Glencoe/McGraw Hill



Economics Student Edition 11-12 2003 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Economics Teacher Works CD 11-12 2003 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

History of Our World: The Ancient World Vol. I 10 2003 Steck-Vaughn

History of Our World: The Modern World Vol. II 10 2003 Steck-Vaughn

Science


Biology: An Everyday Experience 9-12 2004 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Biology Study Guide 10-12 2004 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Biology Teacher Wraparound 10-12 2004 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Biology Teacher Resources 10-12 2004 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Quest Academy Page 2


Thunder Road Community School


Mathematics




Algebra 9-10 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Geometry 10-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill




Algebra - Resource LPG 9-10 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Geometry - Resource LPG 10-11 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Algebra 2 - Resource LPG 11-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Math Level I Indicator - Starter Set Teacher 2005 AGS

Math Level I Indicator - Manual Teacher 2005 AGS

AGS Algebra - Revised 6-12 2004 AGS

Algebra 2 11-12 2004 AGS

AGS Algebra - Revised 6-12 2004 AGS

Steps in Mathematics (Algebra) 9 2000 Varney's Book Store

Algebra 2 9 2002 Glencoe

GED Math 9-12 2002 Steck Vaughn

Thunder Road Page 1







Civics Today: Citizenship, Economics, and You 9-12 2008 Glencoe/McGraw Hill


The American Vision: Modern Times : Student Edition 9-12 2008 Glencoe/McGraw Hill


World History Video Program DVD 9-12 2008 Glencoe/ McGraw-Hill

Discovering Our Past: Medieval and Early Modern Times,

Grade 7 California Student Edition (Hardbound) 7 2006 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Glencoe Discovering Our Past: The American Journey to

World War I, Grade 8 California Student Edition (Hardbound) 8 2006 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Civics Today: Citizenship, Econ and You - CD 7-10 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Economics: Principles and Practices - CD 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Glencoe World History 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill


World History Reading Essentials & Stdy Guide 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

World History Spanish Reading Essentials 9-12 2005 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

American Odyssey: The 20th Century and Beyond 10-12 2004 Glencoe

Civics Today: Citizenship, Econ and You 11-12 2003 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Economics: Principles and Practices 12 2003 McGraw Hill Company

American Odyssey: The United States in the 20th Century 11-12 2002 Glencoe/McGraw Hill

Thunder Road Page 2




Science


Animal Diversity 7-12 2005 Glencoe/ McGraw-Hill

Animal Diversity (Spanish) 7-12 2005 Glencoe/ McGraw-Hill

Chemistry 7-12 2005 Glencoe/ McGraw-Hill

Chemistry (Spanish) 7-12 2005 Glencoe/ McGraw-Hill

Ecology 7-12 2005 Glencoe/ McGraw-Hill

Ecology (Spanish) 7-12 2005 Glencoe/ McGraw-Hill

Life's Structure and Function 7-12 2005 Glencoe/ McGraw-Hill

Motion, Forces, and Energy 7-12 2005 Glencoe/ McGraw-Hill

Motion, Forces, and Energy (Spanish) 7-12 2005 Glencoe/ McGraw-Hill

Physical Science 7-12 2005 Glencoe/ McGraw-Hill

StudentWorks Plus CD-Rom, Life Modules 7-12 2005 Glencoe/ McGraw-Hill

StudentWorks Plus CD-Rom, Physical Modules 7-12 2005 Glencoe/ McGraw-Hill

The Nature of Matter 7-12 2005 Glencoe/ McGraw-Hill

The Nature of Matter (Spanish) 7-12 2005 Glencoe/ McGraw-Hill

Biology 9-12 2004 AGS

Biology TE 9-12 2004 AGS

Biology An Everyday Experience 9-10 2003 Glencoe

Health & Wellness 9-10 2003 Glencoe

Technology Today & Tomorrow 9-10 2003 Glencoe

GED Science 9-12 2002 Steck-Vaughn

Thunder Road Page 3

Student Programs and Services

Books Ordered FY 2012-13

PO# Vendor ISBN # Title # of Copies Price Amount

P13-00148 Amazon 0078257999 Building Geography Skills for Life 20 $10.25 $205.00

P13-00148 Amazon 007-825800-6 Building Geography Skills for Life 3 $2.54 $7.62

P13-00113 Barnes & Noble 9781423103851 The Skin I’m In 90 $6.13 $551.70

P13-00479 SWIRL 1468089471 The Code Switch 40 $8.00 $320.00

P13-00480 Glencoe 978-0-07-878206-0 CA Math Triumphs, Vol. 2B 10 $12.04 $120.40

P13-00781 Barnes & Noble 9780141324524 A Christmas Carol 100 $3.88 $388.00

P13-00781 Barnes & Noble 9780590528375 Jesse 60 $4.79 $287.40

P13-00781 Barnes & Noble 9780440412670 Where the Red Fern Grows 80 $5.59 $447.20

P13-00801 Glencoe Geometry: Teacher's Wraparound (Edition - Boyd) 1 $240.35 $240.35

P13-01040 Barnes & Noble SSO9780590458986 The Glory Fields by Walter Dean Myers 17 $9.99 $169.83

P13-01125 Amazon The Core Six: Essential Strategies for Achieving Excellence with the Common Core [Paperback]2 $14.55 $29.10

P13-01143 Amsco 9781567656404 Economics for Everybody 20 $20.00 $400.00

P13-01143 Amsco 567656579 Economics for Everybody [Teacher's Edition] 2 $10.00 $20.00

P13-01288 Amazon The Core Six: Essential Strategies for Achieving Excellence with the Common Core [Paperback]55 $14.58 $801.90

P13-01599 Amazon 0785409467 Punctuation, Capitalization, and Spelling 5 $6.01 $30.05

P13-01599 Amazon 9781604182668 Algebra, Grades 6 - 9 5 $8.59 $42.95

P13-01599 Amazon 9781604182651 Pre-Algebra, Grades 5 - 8 5 $13.25 $66.25

P13-01599 Amazon 0825128765 Steps To Good Grammar 5 $14.13 $70.65

P13-01950 Barnes & Noble 9780739897034 America's History: Land of Liberty: Beginning to 1877 25 $25.08 $627.00

P13-01950 Barnes & Noble 9780739897041 America's History 25 $21.62 $540.50

P13-01964 Mc Graw Hill 0078760267 Health and Wellness, Student Edition 16 $76.32 $1,221.12

P13-01964 Mc Graw Hill 0078764084 Health and Wellness, TeacherWorks Plus DVD 1 $159.00 $159.00

P13-01964 Mc Graw Hill 1559531010 Key to Geometry Set of Books 1-8 2 $38.95 $77.90

P13-01964 Mc Graw Hill 0913684864 Key to Geometry Answers and Notes for Book 8 2 $5.95 $11.90

P13-01964 Mc Graw Hill 0913684856 Key to Geometry Answers and Notes for Book 7 2 $5.95 $11.90

P13-01964 Mc Graw Hill 0913684848 Key to Geometry Answers and Notes for Book 4-6 2 $5.95 $11.90

P13-01964 Mc Graw Hill 091368483X Key to Geometry Answers and Notes for Book 1-3 2 $5.95 $11.90

P13-01964 Mc Graw Hill 155953088X Key to Algebra Set of Books 1-10 2 $36.95 $73.90

P13-01964 Mc Graw Hill 155953012X Key to Algebra Reproducible Tests for Books 1-10 2 $15.95 $31.90

P13-01964 Mc Graw Hill 155953012X Applying Life Skills Student Edition 1 $52.71 $52.71

P13-01964 Mc Graw Hill 0078884594 Applying Life Skills Teacher Wraparound Edition 2010 1 $78.75 $78.75

P13-01964 Mc Graw Hill 0078884608 Applying Life Skills Student Activity Edition 3 $11.10 $33.30

P13-01934 WestEd 978-1-938287-13-8 Exploring Reflective Supervision and Facilitation 1 $84.00 $84.00

7/22/2013

Alameda County Office of Education Student Programs and Services Division

2013-2014 Science Laboratory Equipment List

Assorted materials for cells

Assorted plastic lab ware

Biological specimens for observation (e.g. preserved eyes, hearts, livers, kidneys, spinal cords and testicles; fresh eyes, stomach and hearts which were dissected in advance; insects throughout their life cycle; plants; lizards; skeletal parts; shells and algae; pond scum with simple organisms)

Blood pressure measuring devices

Cell and organ models with video

Cloud chamber

Dry ice

Inoculation wires

Iron sulfide

Lung volume bags

Microscopes (binocular and regular)

Petri dishes and agar (bacterial and fungal growth)

Plastic planter cups

Prepared and blank microscope slides

Scalpels

Stethoscopes

Stopwatches and jump ropes for fitness evaluations

Triple beam balance

Alameda County Board of Education and

Alameda County Superintendent of Schools

RESOLUTION NO.

Sufficient Textbooks and Instructional Materials

WHEREAS, the Alameda County Office of Education has received notice from the California Department of Education, requiring the Board of Education to certify compliance with Education Code Sections 60119 and California Code of Regulations, Title 5, Section 9531 (c); and

WHEREAS, the County Board of Education held a public hearing on September

10, 2013 WHEREAS, the County Board of Education provided at least ten days notice of

the public hearing posted in three public places within the district that stated the time, place, and purpose of the hearing; and

WHEREAS, the County Board of Education encouraged review and input from

parents, teachers, members of the community and bargaining unit leaders in this public hearing; and

WHEREAS, information provided at the hearing stated that sufficient textbooks

and instructional materials in all subjects are consistent with the cycles and content of the curriculum frameworks.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that for the 2013-2014 school year, the

Alameda County Office of Education has provided each pupil with sufficient textbooks and instructional materials consistent with the cycles and content of the curriculum frameworks.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of September, 2013 by the following vote: Ayes: _____ Noes: _____ Abstention: _____ Absent: _____ ____________________________ ____________________________ Joaquin Rivera, President Sheila Jordan, Superintendent Alameda County Board of Education Alameda County Office of Education

MS/kk

Memorandum No: 11090 Meeting Date: September 10, 2013 TO: Alameda County Board of Education FROM: Movetia Salter, Chief Human Resources Officer RE: Policy & Legislation Committee—Second Reading Background: The following Board Bylaws have been reviewed and updated to include language recommended by CSBA including any updates made to relevant laws:

• BB 9110 County Board Members: Terms of Office • BB 9140 Board Representatives

They were submitted for First Reading at the August 13, 2013 meeting. Action Requested: The Policy and Legislation Committee is recommending that the Board reviews and considers approval of the revisions to BB 9110 and BB 9140 at Second Reading. Attachments: BB 9110 BB 9140 (Att. 8 & 9)

BB 9110 Board Bylaws County Board Members: Terms of Office The County Board shall consist of 7 members whose terms shall be staggered so that as nearly as practicable, one half of the members shall be elected in each even-numbered year. The term of office shall be four years, commencing on the first day in July after their election. (Education Code 5017) Board member terms expire four years after their initial election on the first day in July following the election of new members. (Education Code 5000) A member whose term has expired shall continue to discharge the duties of the office until his/her successor has qualified by taking the oath of office. (Government Code 1302, 1360; Education Code 5017) (cf. 9220 - Governing Board Elections) (cf. 9223 - Filling Vacancies) (cf. 9224 - Oath or Affirmation) (cf. 9250 - Remuneration, Reimbursement, and Other Benefits) Legal Reference: EDUCATION CODE 5000-5033 Election of school district board members 35010 Control of district 35012 Board members; number, election and terms 35107 Eligibility GOVERNMENT CODE 1302 Continuance in office until qualification of successor 1303 Exercising functions of office without having qualified 1360 Necessity of taking constitutional oath Bylaw ALAMEDA COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION adopted: September 22, 1992 Hayward, California revised:

BB 9140 Board Bylaws Board Representatives Representatives to Other Agencies or Organizations The County Board recognizes that effective performance of its community leadership responsibilities may require its participation in district or community committees on matters of concern to the district and its students. As needed, the Board may appoint any of its members to serve as its representative on a district committee or on a committee of another public agency or organization of which the Board or district is a member or to which the Board is invited to participate. The County Superintendent may budget funds for participation of County Board members on advisory committees or as representatives to other public agencies or organizations. When making such appointments, the Board shall clearly specify the authority and responsibilities of the representative(s), including, but not limited to, reporting back to the Board regarding committee activities and/or actions. Board representatives shall not exercise the authority of the Board without prior Board approval. If a committee discusses a topic on which the Board has taken a position, the Board member shall express the position of the Board. When contributing his/her own ideas or opinions, the representative shall clearly indicate that he/she is expressing his/her individual idea or opinion. At its annual organizational meeting, the Board shall designate one Board member as its representative to elect members to the county committee on school district organization. (Education Code 35023) County Committee on School District Reorganization 1. Establishment The County Board acts as the Alameda County Committee on School District Organization. Where no legal provisions exist as to the governance of the County Committee on School District Reorganization, it will be governed by existing bylaws applicable to the County Board. 2. Governance The Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the County Committee on School District Organization shall be the President and the First Vice President, respectively. The County Superintendent of Schools shall serve as Secretary to the County Committee on School District Organization. 3. Criteria for Trustee Areas

The County Committee on School District Organization will utilize the following criteria when establishing or changing the boundaries of trustee areas: a. Topography; b. Geography; c. Cohesiveness, continuity, integrity and compactness of territory; d. Community of interests of the trustee areas; and e. No discrimination by purpose or effect. The County Committee shall insure that such trustee areas are as nearly equal in population as practical. Legal Reference: EDUCATION CODE 4000-4014 County committees on school district organization 35020-35046 School district officers and agents (power of governing board to employ or appoint) 35160 Authority of governing boards GOVERNMENT CODE 54952.2 Meetings Management Resources: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PUBLICATIONS California Department of Education District Organization Handbook, 2010 Bylaw ALAMEDA COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION adopted: June 25, 1991 Hayward, California revised: January 24, 1995 revised:

SJ/kk

Memorandum No: 11091 Meeting Date: September 10, 2013 TO: Alameda County Board of Education FROM: Sheila Jordan, Superintendent RE: Items from the Secretary – API scores Background The Superintendent, as the Secretary to the Board, will present topics of interest to the Board and the general public. Action Requested Information only. Attachment (Article) API Scores by Doug Oakley Oakland Tribune Contra Costa Times Excerpt of 2012-13 API Scores (Att. 9)

http://www.insidebayarea.com/news/ci_23976039/api-scores-alameda-county-students-struggle-hit-state?source=rss

Page 1 of 3 Sep 04, 2013 04:57:54PM MDT

API scores: Alameda County students struggle to hit state targetBy Doug Oakley Oakland Tribune Contra Costa TimesPosted: InsideBayArea.com

BERKELEY -- Almost half of the largest school districts in Alameda County missed a statewide target fortests measuring academic performance, according to data released Thursday by the state Department ofEducation.

Seven of the 16 largest districts in the county failed to reach a score of 800 for the Academic PerformanceIndex, or API score, which is based on standardized tests last spring of students in grades 2-11 insubjects that include English, math and history. Scores on the test range from 200 to 1,000.

California schools as a whole didn't meet the standard either, turning in a score of 791, down two pointsfrom last year.

Tom Torlakson, state Superintendent of Public Instruction, attributed the drops to a shift to new CommonCore standards that are not assessed on the current exams, along with budget cuts that have reduced perstudent funding in California far below the national average.

In addition, several East Bay schools joined hundreds statewide that have been newly identified as failingunder the federal No Child Left Behind law

In Alameda County, the worst performers were school districts in Hayward, Oakland and Emeryville. BothHayward and Oakland turned in scores of 721 while Emeryville posted a score of 722. Also scoring under800 were San Lorenzo, which dropped nine points from last year, and San Leandro, three points lower.But Hayward, while still under 800, improved this year by three points.

Rising to the top of the heap were Piedmont with a score of 933, followed by Pleasanton at 909 andDublin at 904. Fremont posted a score of 891 and Berkeley 821.

In Oakland, where scores dropped seven points from last year, Superintendent Gary Yee said the drop inscores can be attributed to a new way of teaching as districts transition to the Common Core curriculum,which shuns learning to memorize for tests and pushes critical thinking.

"Now the teaching is less of a drill-and-kill approach for basic skills learning and more of a complexthinking approach to academic writing and reading for understanding," Yee said. "It doesn't mean ourstudents are any less prepared, it just means what they are being tested on is different from what they arelearning."

In Fremont, where schools scored in the top five for the county with 891, an improvement of six pointsover the last year, Superintendent Jim Morris said his schools improved despite teachers having to learnthe new Common Core curriculum.

"When you look at the API scores, our trajectory of growth the past four years has been eight, eight, eightand six," Morris said. "We've focused a lot on helping teachers prepare for teaching the new national



Page 2 of 3 Sep 04, 2013 04:57:54PM MDT

Common Core standards. I feel good, even with that -- even as much as we focused on the CommonCore standards that have to change to make the instruction more rigorous -- we still took a pretty goodjump, especially when we're so high performing to begin with."

Hayward Unified School District Interim Superintendent Stan Dobbs painted a positive picture of hisdistrict's three-point improvement, even though it was one of the lowest scores in the county.

"With only eight of the 18 school districts in Alameda County improving their API -- and the state showingan overall decline, this is evidence that Hayward Unified School District is on the right track," Dobbs said.

San Leandro Unified Superintendent Mike McLaughlin said his school district's drop from 742 to 739, wellbelow the state target of 800, "is disheartening to all stakeholders in the district because of the hard workthat was put in to address the areas of need.

"With that being said we are very proud of the gains of both of our middle schools, Muir and Bancroft,"McLaughlin said. "And our high school stayed the same as last year."

San Lorenzo Unified School District had a sizable drop from 748 to 739. Officials there said they wouldredouble their efforts.

" For schools that showed decreases in results, the district leadership is analyzing data and developing asite specific plan of support for those sites and subgroups," said Katarin Jurich, director of assessmentand English learner programs for the district.

Some of those programs include more teacher training for the new Common Core practices and a focuson English learners in prekindergarten through third grade, she said.

Torlakson also released statewide passage rates for the California High School Exit Exam, noting that theclass of 2013 passed at the highest rate since the test became a graduation requirement, with 95.5percent passing.

Staff writers Rebecca Parr, Chris De Benedetti and Ashley McGlone contributed to this story. ContactDoug Oakley at 510-843-1408. Follow him at .Twitter.com/douglasoakley

MORE INFORMATIONWhat's an API score?API stands for Academic Performance Index. It's a score that can range from 200 to 1,000 based on howstudents at a given school or district performed on a series of standardized tests and other measuresduring the previous school year. The statewide goal for all schools is 800.What's program improvement?Program Improvement, also known as PI, is a category of schools and districts that for two straight yearshave missed at least one of the many targets set by the federal No Child Left Behind Act. Those goalsrelate to the percentage of students who prove on standardized tests that they are proficient at Englishand math. That percentage is going up every year. This time, it's near 90 percent. Next year, it will be 100percent.Dozens of states have received waivers from the U.S. Department of Education in exchange for adoptingalternative reforms, but not California. However, the Oakland district has received a waiver as part of aconsortium of districts.


http://Twitter.com/douglasoakley


Page 3 of 3 Sep 04, 2013 04:57:54PM MDT

Detailed Academic Performance Index, Adequate Year Progress and California High School Exit Examresults, including school scores, are available at .http://www.cde.ca.govA searchable database is at . More information about Contra Costawww.contracostatimes.com/educationCounty results is in the On Assignment blog at .www.ibabuzz.com/onassignment


http://www.cde.ca.gov

http://www.contracostatimes.com/education

http://www.ibabuzz.com/onassignment