Alvarado Elementary School --> PTA

Alvarado Elementary School Site Council Minutes School Year 2005-2006

Minutes for Alvarado School Site Council Meeting December 13, 2005

Members Present:

• Staff: Robert Broecker, Mary Lou Cooper, Luis Sierra, Nancy Hawkins (alt.), Clementina Durón
• Parents/Community: Nick Driver, Shem Korngold , Claire Siegel, Rebecka Wright, Frank Bien (alt.), Debbie Costello (alt.)

Meeting called to order (# 1) by chair, Robert Broecker

Agenda Items are noted as “(#)”:

There were no public comments (# 2).

Nancy Hawkins gave an update on what used to be called SB65 (# 10) and is now a block grant to SFUSD entitled “Comprehensive Student Support Program”. She said there is no protection for the funding to continue to go to Alvarado. This academic year SFUSD agreed to make no changes but that is not secure for 2006-07. How these monies are allocated in future years could affect Nancy’s placement at Alvarado. It depends on the Superintendent and her staff as to who benefits from these block grant monies. Nancy emphasized that the program is working here at Alvarado with the sand tray, marriage and family therapist interns, etc. Our effective program is due to the support of the SSC and the PTA. She stated that our current referrals to the SST (Student Study Team) are 44 in number. Last May there were only 39. She projects this year’s number will be double of 2004-05.

A quorum finally was present and the meeting returned to a review of the minutes of November 8, 2005 (# 3). With one minor clarification the minutes were unanimously approved as corrected.

Continuing with the review of the Academic Plan (# 4), Robert Broecker went over Goal 1: Academic Achievement. In light of the Consent Decree having been removed for the coming year, he has suggested that all existing programs and staff (by position) be named. The discussion that followed about whether to mention the PTA funded programs in the upcoming plan was inconclusive.

Nick Driver presented a review of Goal 3: Initiatives to Improve Instruction. The suggestions presented were for the sake of clarity.

Both of these Academic Plan Goal Reviews are part of preparing a working document by the site council. It is a work in progress and not an action item as yet. Both presenters made available these portions for reference during the discussion and are incorporated as a part of these minutes.

The loss of Consent Decree funding (# 6) to Alvarado will now be a political item decided by the School Board according to Nick Driver. Robert Broecker reviewed the positions that are currently funded by Consent Decree. Principal, Clementina Durón reminded us we need to focus on programs and students, not people. Discussion ensued as to what the School Board’s strategy will be in allocating this money. It is too early to be alarmed but we need to be prepared.

Our first community meeting (# 5) is scheduled for January 24,2006 at 6 p.m. The directive is that it must be by February 7. Our focus will be on the Academic Plan, NOT on the funding since we will not know until later in February. The meeting format from 2005 was used to foster discussion on how to run the 1/24/06 meeting. Discussion followed on how to have translators on hand effectively. Shem will look into finding students (looking at $25/hr). To increase attendance the suggestion was made to promote it as a family night with BINGO by seeking assistance from Alvarado After School (AAS) and food from PTA (which Rebecka Wright will look into). Dinner will be from 5:30-6 p.m. Meeting will be from 6-7 p.m.

At 7:30 the meeting was extended an additional 15 minutes.

Principal, Clementina Durón reported (# 7) that a crisis team has been formed made up primarily of resource personnel (non classroom staff.) The team is working on an emergency preparedness plan specific to Alvarado

The Prop. H money that is to provide for a school nurse is in place, but we have no candidate for the position. Ms. Durón has contacted Davide Celoria (Asst. Superintendent K-8) for help.

Due on December 15, 2005 are the contractor bids for upcoming renovations at Alvarado funded by Prop A. Ms. Durón reported that the impact on our site is seemingly greater than originally thought. There is a need to prepare for some schedule changes. We will involve the fire marshal for safety checks on compromised facility access.

The position of parent liaison as described in our academic plan has now been filled by Alvarado parent Nancy Velasco.

Shem Korngold reported that there was a positive response and good turnout for the ELAC (# 9) workshop held on Saturday 12/3/05. It was mentioned that we still need to address the needs of non Spanish speaking parents of English Learners (ELs).

Due to time, Rebecka Wright passed on presenting a PTA report (# 8).

There were no other reports (# 11).

The meeting was adjourned (# 12) at 7:35 p.m.

Submitted by:

Mary Lou Cooper
SSC member representing Classified Staff

Minutes for Alvarado School Site Council Meeting November 8, 2005

Present:
Community Members: Ana Martínez, Claire Siegel, Debbie Costello, Melissa Serrano, Nick Driver, Rebecka Wright, Shem Korngold, Tim Danison and Violeta
Garcia.

Staff: Cecilia McDonagh, Clementina Durón, Karen Mooney, Robert Broecker, Rosemary Hiller and Luis Sierra.

Meeting called to order at 6:05 p.m.

Public Comment: Violeta informed us of the ELAC meetings. ELAC participants are excited and willing to take part in the workshops, which will happen on November 19. Interested workshop topics are: Positive discipline and help with math, reading, and writing.Violeta has volunteered to translate at Site Council Meetings.

Approval of minutes: Minutes from October 5th and October 18th meetings were approved with the following corrections:
- October 5th: Parent Liaison to work 15 hours per week. Motion carried to approve minutes.
- October 18th: Correction: Clementina has document on EXCEL, not Mary Lou.
Nick motions to approve minutes, seconded by Shem. Motion carries to approve minutes from both meetings.

Review Goal # 2: Academy Equity/ Academic Plan:
Karen and Claire presented their portion of site plan. Deletions and additions were highlighted and discussed with input from the group. Clementina will check the test score data and make the necessary
recommendations so that the document can have more accurate information as to percentages. Robert will help write a bullet on technology integration. Revised Goal #2 with current data and additions will be shared at a later date.

Nick Driver offered to pair up with Rosemary and work on Goal #3:
Initiatives to Improve Instruction as he had last year. Melissa volunteered
to work on Goal 5: Parent and Community Involvement.

Planning for Community Meetings:
Tuesday, January 24th: Presentation of Academic Plan
Motion passed to approve this date.There will be an additional two meetings in March

A discussion ensued about upcoming meetings:
Thursday, November 10th: Prop H meeting-Mission High School

Wednesday November 16th, 6:00 p.m.: District Community Meeting regarding Prop A. Overview and open questions and answers by architect and hygienist.

Tuesday, November 29th: Greening Prop A meeting. Nick and Melissa to attend this meeting.

A Prop A discussion ensued. Clementina reported that we met with the Prop A people as well as with the district. She reports it was a positive meeting with some give and take on the site's part. She explained the phasing aspect of the project and informed us that no exact timing was given but that
construction would likely begin in February or March. Most of the heavy work will be completed during the summer. Nick reported that we do not know who the construction company will be. We do know the site is over-budget. More information will be given at next week's meeting.

Prop H update: We now have a librarian every Monday. His name is Ed Buckley. Mary Lou provided background knowledge on Mr. Buckley. She reports he was a classroom teacher with a Language Arts/ Drama background.

EXCEL Program discussion:
Mark McLean (program director) arrived to give a report on EXCEL after-school program.
Mark informed the group that the program is supposed to be evaluated twice a year; however, that has not occurred. The evaluator will be coming on Monday, November 14th to do this year's first review. Mark was asked about the scoring/ rubric used to evaluate the program. He reported that in the past, EXCEL got a 6 though he did not know what that meant. He too is seeking more clarification about this from the evaluator. He detailed the way the program is structured. There is:

- 45 min. homework assistance
- 45 min. academic enrichment (technology, language arts, activities based on themes, literature groups, journals, cooking, etc.)

Criteria for selection into the program:
Students between the 25th_ 50th percentiles on standardized test in literacy (basic or below). Some children do not fall into this category. Teachers have recommended these children to the program. At the present time, enrollment is focused on ELL students. 109 students are enrolled in the program with a 101-106 attendance. 95 children are required by the grant.

EXCEL budget: 59,200 plus 5,000 (literacy improvement plan students).
Mark expressed a desire to align EXCEL help with classroom needs.

Assessments used by EXCEL: CELDT.
-Use Houghton Mifflin assessments (pre / post test).
Monies voted in by SSC last year equals $1.00 per student per day.
Mark let us know that older EXCEL programs are largely enrichment based. He expressed that there are challenges faced from varying achievement levels and homework with one teacher and one helper.
Robert suggests perhaps revisiting / creating a new homework policy. Teachers gave testimonials of how they do homework and serious thought was given to looking at internal assessments for driving EXCEL instruction. Mark to report at next meeting as to this year's evaluation and he informed us that the grant is in place for at least another year.

Principals Report:

• · New SSC board members meeting at the district level to be held Wednesday, November 9th from 6:00-8:00 P.M. at 555 Franklin.
• Safety patrol with fifth graders is going well.
• A solar panel will be installed by Pac Bell. This will save us $50.00 per month for twenty years. There was a question of appropriate location. The roof is not a legal option. The other suggested location is by the planters near the breezeway. The solar panel is a 6' pole.
• PTA Report: There was no report given by Rebecka Wright.

Other Reports:
Mary Lou informed us that the budget is fully loaded. We can now begin to pay consultants. She needs information and budgets from consultants to put in formal requests for money. Forms (ie: K-Reso) are available online (Board of Education website). Nick proposes an agenda item for next meeting to be about Consent Decree and its future.

Meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
Minutes respectfully submitted by Luis Sierra and Karen Mooney

BACK TO THE TOP

Minutes for Alvarado School Site Council Meeting October 18, 2005

Community Members: Tim Danison, Rebecka Wright, Claire Siegel

Staff Members: Mary Lou Cooper, Rosemary Hiller, Clementina Duron, Luis Sierra, Robert Broecker, Karen Mooney, Cecilia Mc Donagh

A quorum is not present so no issues can be voted on. Robert calls the meeting to order.

Minutes:

Robert asks for people to sign up for recording of minutes at each meeting.
Rosemary volunteers to record at this meeting.
Minutes from last meeting cannot be approved (no quorum). Robert will send them out through e-mail and ask that members approve them through email.

PTA Report:

• Rebecka reports that the PTA is generating fundraising ideas. At this point, fundraising for next year's programs is a focus.
• The PTA is worried about the use of space at the school during the preparation for the Silent Auction. The concern is that with construction there will be no space to store art items.
• There has been a report that the construction will not begin until March (this is an unofficial report).
• Clarification for the allocation of Prop H funds is needed. What guidelines are in place for how it can be allocated? How can the $5.00 per student art supply money be accessed?
• Mary Lou points out that the paper work that is necessary for hiring a nurse through the Prop H funds has been filed. We are waiting for the district to make the next move.
• Since there is no paid staff in the library it has been difficult to keep it organized and functioning. Karen points out that it is hard to shelve the books as well as read to the kids and check their books in and out. Rebecka reports that there is a small amount of PTA money to hiresomeone to help maintain the library. (a few hours per week)

Managing the Academic Plan

History:

• Robert describes the process that has been used to manage the academic plan for the last two years. He points out that the plan will be due by February and in order to avoid some of the last minute crunch teams are set up to examine portions of the plan. The plan is divided into the
  five separate goals. Teams of two or three examine and monitor the plan. Each month, the findings of the team will be reported to the site council. These findings are presented at the community meeting in January where input will be solicited. This should facilitate the process of revision of both the goals and the descriptions of the specific actions to improve academic progress.
• Robert proposes that we continue this plan.
• Members that are present sign up to be on one of the five committees. The remaining members still need to sign up for a team. (Refer to the Monitoring Academic Plan sign up sent in last email)
• Karen proposes that we continue with teams that are made up of both staff and community members.
• Upon examining the Site Plan document it is found that there are some discrepancies between the opening statements of the goals the table where they are outlined. The members who were previously on the site council verify that the correct version is stated in the table beginning on
  page 10 of the plan.
• Cecelia points out that none of the recommendations that were made for Goal 5 last year were added to the plan.

Safe Harbor:

• Clementina explains the definition and guidelines of Safe Harbor designation. The designation is granted based on alternatives in interpreting how the school scores as a whole on the testing. The AYP score has grown 10% as a whole and therefore the school has been identified as being in a Safe Harbor stage. This designation is good for one year. After this year the criteria for meeting Adequate Yearly Progress is back into effect. For Alvarado, it means that there is a one year reprieve in the five year
• Rebecka points out that on the average there are 18 students per grade level (2-5) that are not making enough progress to score as proficient on the state tests.
• Clementina suggests separating the ELL scores between the CLAD classes and the Immersion classes. This will allow us to examine student progress in a different way.
• Clementina states that she is more concerned with the future academic life of our students than with what sanctions could be imposed on our school due to test scores. She worries about sending students who are not prepared on to middle school. Are they tracked due to test scores? Are their opportunities limited? She feels that if these students need to improve in reading then more time should be spent in reading instruction.
• Claire brings up the idea of an ESL teacher. She points out that there was such a program in the past. She has concerns about the progress of ELL students that are in the CLAD program.

EXCEL:

• Robert reminds the council that we wanted to revisit the issue of how effective our program is in comparison to other schools.
• Clementina reports that Mark has informed her that the program was never evaluated last year and therefore any comparisons between our program and other programs cannot be based on facts. There has been an evaluation this year.
• Tim points out that there seem to be three main issues surrounding EXCEL.
  • Daycare versus academic enrichment
  • The requirements necessary for a student to qualify to attend the program
  • Is EXCEL in compliance with the grant?
• Mark will do a presentation concerning the program at a future meeting.
• There is some controversy about what the guidelines are for this program. There have been conflicting reports about whether there are a set number of students that must be served, the ratios that are set, and what the main focus of the program is supposed to be. Are there guidelines
  concerning these issues that would define whether the grant parameters are being fulfilled?
• Clementina points out that there is a document that lists the guidelines. She will make it available to the Site Council Members at a future meeting.
• Claire questions the use of the extra money that was allotted to EXCEL last year. It was proposed that the money be used to extend the scope of the program to include K and 1 students. Yet, it was also presented that the ratio of students to adult needed to be lowered.
• Tim wants to clarify what any allotted money is supposed to be used for.

Long Term Plan for Improving Achievement:

• Tim brings up the idea of organizing and examining student test data in a different manner in order to track improvement of groups of students. He feels that this could help identify what programs or changes boosted student achievement.
• The idea of comparing different groups of students to each other and using this to monitor progress is discussed as an ineffective method.
• Tim volunteers to collect and organize date so that it is easy to follow groups of students from 2-5. Robert volunteers to help him.
• The idea of how a strike would impact the current budget at the school was brought up. No one was sure what could happen but it was pointed out that budgets can be frozen and have been in the past.

ELAC Committee Report:

• Officers for the ELAC Committee were elected last Friday.
• Ideas about how to bring in more parents and topics for parent education conferences are being generated.
• Immersion teachers are being asked to survey parents concerning their concerns and interests surrounding parent forums.
• District is sending Clementina a job description for a Parent Liaison. We will hire someone for 28 weeks at 15 hours per week to serve in this position. There are already a few candidates. This is not a district position because it is under 20 hours per week.

Workday

Tim Danison asked for help in soliciting more jobs/projects for parent workday. There are fewer requests for jobs than in past years. The idea of cleaning up the stage and the room under the stage was discussed. It was pointed out that in order to clear the room under the stage of old computers, each one must be recorded by serial number. Quite a job!

BACK TO THE TOP

Minutes for Alvarado School Site Council Meeting October 5, 2005

In attendance:

Community Members: Ana Martínez, Tim Danison, Nick Driver, Melissa Serrano,
Claire Siegel

Staff Members: Mary Lou Cooper, Rosemary Hiller, Nancy Hawkins, Clementina
Durón, Luis Sierra, Robert Broecker, Karen Mooney

Quorum is present. Robert calls the meeting to order.

Brief discussion about alternate meeting space - Rosemary offers her room for future meetings.

Approval of minutes:

• Discussed "safe harbour" terminology. What does this mean exactly? We need more clarification as to our actual current status.
• Need someone to look into the meaning and implication of this "safe harbour" status. Clementina will get back to us.
• Melissa makes motion, seconded by Tim to pass minutes. Minutes are approved.

FUNDING

Funds from last year included $20,000 in this year's budget. We now have $20,000 less than before due to this clerical error. All funds come from WSF (Weighted Student Formula) which has already been spent. The question is: What to do with the targeted/ categorical funds?

• Clementina put forth the following suggestions for the additional budgetallocations:
  • $8,584 in WSF
  • Use the Title 1 monies ($21,480) to narrow the achievement gap.
  • Put LEP/SIP/and Title 1 monies under WSF for instructional supplies.
  • ELAC: $2,500
  • EL Professional Development & Extended Teacher time to work with Title 1 students: $4,980
  • Translations: $5,000
  • Consultant: $2,000
  • Parent Education/Liaison: $7,000
• Rose sought clarification about Special Ed/ Inclusion. Is the site or the district responsible for closing these students' achievement gap?
  Clementina: The district, not the site, is responsible for closing their achievement gap.
• We reviewed decisions made last week (see minutes from 9/6).
• Clementina included last week's recommendations, only lowered amounts originally proposed. She feels that translations are a priority, especially for EL parent outreach and education.
• There was clarification on the position of consultant. This would be as a follow-up for our training for Junior Great Books. This person would be bilingual and would help teachers implement and answer follow-up questions about the program.
• Pilar Mejía (Multilingual department) and Rigby reps would serve as consultants for On Our Way to English.
• EL Professional Development: This means that teachers would be compensated for any extra time spent after school in trainings.
• Parent Liaison: would be an outreach person to bring EL parents to the school. Clementina finds there is a need for such a person. She did some research and learned that a half-time salary for said position is $15,000. The position at Alvarado would be limited to 1 5 hrs/week. They would be hired as a consultant for parent education but this role is not as yet defined and would depend on the needs of teachers.
• Nancy gave a history of the parent liaisons at Alvarado in the past. The problems that arose were that there was a lack of supervision and the professionalism of the individual was questionable. She sees a need, based on this history, to monitor the reliability and professionalism of the person in this position.
• Tim agrees with the need and sees it as a worthy cause. He proposed we try to define the outcomes of such a role. We must figure out how to measure the efficacy of this role.
• Rose raised the question of : How much of this is going to the direct service of children? It should be something designated to the direct services to students.
• Clementina argued that the parent liaison would improve parent education around roles, resources, and responsibilities and would help parents help their children. This in turn narrows the achievement gap and correlates to
  student performance.
• Nick asked if it would not make more sense to put more money into the EXCEL program and hire a credentialed teacher to lead EXCEL.
• Claire gave some history saying that the former Park & Rec children filtered into EXCEL once it was replaced by EXCEL. She believes teachers working w/ EXCEL students is crucial.
• Clementina informed the group of a letter going home to EXCEL parents with clarifications about the program:
  
  1. Students with low test scores should be in the program
  2. It is not free childcare
  3. parents must pick their children up on time from the program
  
• There are too many students in the program as it is. Fortunately, there are skilled and qualified teachers teaching in it this year.
• Claire reminded us of what Davis told us last year-that there needed to be a certain # of students enrolled (100?).
• Robert reminded us that we are working with last year's budget. We asked the staff and the parents what their priorities were. Now we are adding new funding items. He recommends that we honor the priorities that were voted on last year.
• Melissa said we could be creative about our funding. Literacy was a priority for both teachers and parents.
• Tim asks: Is there a plan for moving students up? What things will be the most effective? Has this goal been talked about?
• Robert: There is no multi-year/longitudinal plan in place.
• Nancy responded by saying that there were things in place to address these questions such as SSTs, Coordinated Council. Clementina added Reading Recovery.
• Clementina recognized the need to develop such a long-term plan to see if monies are being spent efficiently. She says that perhaps we could assign one day/week for staff to work with ELD students.
• Robert objects to the lowering of the amounts that were agreed upon last week and to the addition of another program (parent liaison) added to last week's recommendations.
• Nancy feels that position needs to be monitored.
• Claire suggested that perhaps there were other community members interested in the position of parent liaison. Luis recommends Maritza (our lunch person). Nick prefers Maritza. Clementina is looking into who could fill this position.
• Tim asks: What is this money getting incrementally?
• Nick feels we need to align this program with Title 1 students and trained professionals.
• Rose brought us back to Robert's original objection. Why are we cutting two of the categories from last week?
• Clementina answered by saying that the $16,000 of discretionary funds were now gone. She feels that parents are responsive to their children's education. This area was one where we could get more for our money. Translations were also important in creating more accessibility to their children's education.
• Rose asked what the difference was between ELAC and the Parent Liaison position.
• Clementina responded by saying that these could be combined. The ELAC committee could then prioritize how such money would be spent on the liaison position. As the principal, she feels the parent liaison position is important for drawing parents to the school.
• Claire asked if there was any other choices for directly servicing kids.
• Robert said that Extended Teacher time. He wanted to approve the original $6,000 that had been voted on last week.
• Tim asked what the money could be spent on if a parent liaison is not found.
• Nick informed us (as an aside) that $10,500 had been approved by the Fitzpatrick Foundation for the Alvarado Writer's Workshop.
• Mary Lou advocated using some of the extended teacher time money to hire a roving sub that would help students during the school day.
• Tim made a motion to approve the 1st 3 items from Clementina's recommendations and conditionally approve the remaining 2 items contingent on that we clearly define the outcomes and we find the people to do them.
  His motion was not seconded.
• Melissa made another motion: to approve Clementina's recommendations as is.
  This motion is seconded by Mary Lou.

Discussion:

• Mary Lou tells us that Title 1 funds can be allocated towards Junior Great Books.
• -Robert expressed reservations about funding a consultant and parent liaison that have not been discussed with the community (staff and parents).
• Nick adds a friendly amendment to Melissa's motion. If parent outreach is to indeed help close the achievement gap, could we not augment a pre-existing program (EXCEL) with Title 1 funds? We can do that or set up Extended Teacher Time, but wants to give our principal ultimate discretion
  in the matter.
• Nancy suggested we wait till perhaps next fall to see whether we really need a consultant. She would rather spend the $2,000 towards translations or other direct services to kids.
• Mary Lou sought clarification on Nick's friendly amendment.
• Nick responded by saying that we carry our Clementina's suggestions via EXCEL but that the program be earmarked specifically for Alvarado teachers.
• Tim: Who does the director of EXCEL answer to?
• Nick: The site administrator. In this case, Clementina.
• Nancy talked about some of the feelings shared by staff members about EXCEL. Some feel it takes away from other things we can fund. EXCEL replaced Park & Rec and was sold as a self-funded program. It ended up not being so and site funds were allocated towards it. Nancy recommends that we go with Clementina's recommendations for budget allocations.
• Nick: Given that EXCEL will most likely be cut next year, we need to start looking into alternative after-school programs that would take EXCEL's place when it is no longer funded.
• Tim suggested that for future budgetary decisions, we submit proposals. We need to think about how we are presenting programs to be funded so that we can make more informed decisions.

We come back to the motion put forth by Melissa but there is further discussion.

• Nick rescinds his friendly amendment to fund these allocations through EXCEL. Given the discussion around the EXCEL program, he suggests we put it on the agenda for our next meeting.
• Mary Lou responded to Tim's concerns about submitting budget proposals. Monies can be switched through budget transfers.
• Robert once again returned to the priority votes of both staff and parents from the spring.
• Clementina wanted to know if parent education had been discussed as a priority. Monies could be collapsed w/ ELAC who would then determine whether a parent liaison is indeed a priority. She proposes moving the $7,000 from the parent liaison position to ELAC.
• Robert reviewed how we had voted for ELAC last week (see minutes from 9/6). He brings Melissa's motion to a vote.
  All in favor:8 Opposed: 3 The motion carries.
• Nick makes further motion: That the parent liaison job description be defined by and in consultation with the parent liaison department of the district. This motion is seconded by Tim.
  All in favor: all Motion carries.
• Meeting adjourned at 5:00 pm.
  Minutes respectfully submitted by Karen Mooney.
  

BACK TO THE TOP