ML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
Master Plan for Education.
Note: Postings on today's topic that appeared on the Web site by 8:00
PM Pacific time are included in this summary.
1a. What areas from the draft Plan would you like to see kept in the
final version, and, importantly, what is missing? These might be
general areas or specific points.
- Several of the Plan's bold ideas were noted: student centered,
promotes true equity, approach towards a seamless system, universal
pre-school, dual language proficiency, adequacy model for financing,
demand for fully qualified teachers.
- Participants noted what they would like to keep in the plan:
accountability, provision of quality education environment, provision
and applications of appropriate technology.
- Some shortcomings: how to hold different parts of the system
accountable, how to provide college-bound curriculum and career
education.
- What's missing: the importance of the arts in education, play as a
part of the Early Childhood component, citizenship training, focus on
reducing the high school drop out rate, requirement for library media
teachers, the value of contextual learning that takes place in Career
Technical Education programs, discussion of workforce preparation at
the secondary level, concrete programs and projects, hands-on skills
training, the role of volunteer-based adult education programs.
- We need a balanced curriculum: literacy, math, science, social
studies, arts (performing and visual), humanities, and health.
- The Plan must include a way that each student regardless of
college/career plans can or could be self-sufficient after high
school.
- The Plan needs to address teacher credentialing, childhood
development training, and uniformity in credentialing programs.
- Multiple measures are proposed to improve accountability but there
is no definition or description of what this would entail.
- The Master Plan ignores many realities, such as (1) seventy to
eighty percent of the jobs in the U.S. do not require a four-year
degree, (2) only about twenty-five percent of the population
completes a four-year degree, and (3) most employers are small
businesses that cannot afford to offer in-house training programs.
- The Plan under serves 75% of students who do not attend
postsecondary schools.
- We need two separate plans: (1) The youth plan, aimed at improving
the educational processes for children to prosper in society, and (2)
The adult plan for those who, either by immigration or misspent
youth, have reached adulthood without the benefit of plan 1.
- The Plan ought to have "versions" specifically written for normal
schools, alternative schools, special education, distance learning
approaches, rural schools, GATE programs, at-risk communities, and
many more "contexts" for learning in California.
- The Plan is good in that it is so general. Now it needs to be
consolidated into organizational units with specific goals, which can
be translated into legislation. The Plan seems to be more of an
"audit" tool than a "plan" to follow to achieve a goal.
- The relationships between the State Superintendent of Schools, the
State Board of Education, and the Secretary of Education need to be
more clearly defined.
- Many respondents want Adult Education governance to remain with
K-12. Concerns about changing governance to the community college
system centered on potential changes in funding, a deterioration in
community college effectiveness, program organization, lack of
financial analysis on which to base the change, the fact that most
adult education courses lead to a high school diploma, bureaucracy,
credentialing standards, cost efficiency.
- It was noted however that there has been some misinterpretation of
the Plan, which in fact would transfer only administrative
responsibility to the community colleges, continuing the mixed
delivery system that now exists. The goal is to reduce redundant
administrative structures. Furthermore, the Plan seeks to achieve
reciprocity of treatment for adult education providers be they from
K-12 or the community colleges. Here the goal is to eliminate the
artificial separation in status of professional educators and remove
obstacles to alignment and articulation of courses.
- If the goal is to reduce redundant administrative structures, then
why not place administrative supervision for all of adult education
within CDE?
- When examining where the governance rests for adult education, the
Plan needs to be cognizant of both state and federal fund sources.
- There will be an attempt to strike a better balance regarding the
needs of non college-bound students in the next iteration of the
Plan, but two objectives will be preserved: to avoid assuming college
bound OR work bound, and to advocate a comprehensive curriculum that
is rigorous and challenging in all areas (vocational, CTE, college
prep).
- Participants engaged in a lengthy discussion of home rule, noting
the differences of opinion about the type of local control mentioned
in the Plan and whether local control is in the best interest of all
students. If local districts want to provide programs or implement
strategies that are not in conflict with the state's interests (or
detrimental to students) should they have the authority to do so? The
concept of home rule authority attempts to address this issue.
- The constitution does not allow the state government to relinquish
to local authorities its responsibility to provide a free and
equitable public education. The "home rule" provision, however, may
provide a means for the local community to share that responsibility.
Assuming that the local communities are best positioned to identify
and address local issues, the "home rule" provision merits further
consideration.
1b. For the areas you see as essential to have in the Plan, who
should be accountable for seeing that they are carried out properly?
- Accountability needs to be viewed as goals or achievements.
Standards need to be flexible to foster the creative energy necessary
for educating.
2a. For those who agree that ending the division between
career/vocational education and college prep would be helpful, please
tell us how you think the Master Plan can do a better job of
describing the intent to promote a rich integrated curriculum. Also:
will this approach really avoid fostering the perception that
students who don't go to college are second class citizens?
- A suggestion was made to make high school more choice-oriented:
Students would finish a course when they learn the content as
demonstrated by product or performance. They finish high school when
they meet all the requirements...not when 4 years are up. If students
begin to fail a class and cannot catch up, they can step out of the
class and start it over again another semester. Provide choices in
the first years of high school that give the students a taste of
vocational education and other post-secondary choices. This means
high school may take 4 years or it may take 6, depending on the
student. More choices and flexibility may support learners more
effectively.
2b. For those who feel that it is essential to keep the two kinds
of courses separate, please tell us if you think there are other
kinds of changes in the system that would help to avoid students'
choosing (or being "tracked" into) vocational prep when it is not the
best option for them. How do we assure that students who make such
choices do not have the option of college attendance foreclosed as a
consequence? (No responses.)
3. Can the state have an effective accountability system without
assessment of students? If many parents opt out of having their
children participate in testing, what impact will it have on this
system? Would you say "reject statewide testing" - and if so, what
alternatives can you suggest? Or would you say "keep the statewide
testing program and improve it" - and if so, in what ways?
- We must test and we must do it better if we are to fix the problems
in California's educational system (specifically grades 9-12). You
cannot tell what is being produced without good, appropriate testing,
with intelligent interpretation.
While this summary contains the highlights from the many ideas that
were offered, far more comprehensive information may be found in the
discussion archives.
We highly recommend that you read the original postings to discover
the full richness of the discussion. We suggest you chose the Thread
viewing option.
While this summary contains the highlights from participants' comments, far more comprehensive information may be found in the individual postings.
Background summaries, daily topics, questions and background information are available from the
Agenda
page.
I welcome your comments on the summaries.
Sally Hedman
Reporter