sfusd 2008-2012 strategic plan

8/9/2019 SFUSD 2008-2012 Strategic Plan

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sfusd-2008-2012-strategic-plan 1/58

BEYOND THE TALK: TAKING ACTIONto EDUCATE EVERY CHILD NOW

SFUSD 2008-2012 Strategic Plan Version 1 published June, 2008



BEYOND THE TALK: TAKING ACTION to EDUCATE EVERY CHILD NOW



“The San Francisco Unified School District sees the achievementgap as the greatest social justice/civil rights issue facing our coun-

try today; there cannot be justice for all without closing this gap.”

Carlos A. Garcia

Superintendent, SFUSD

BEYOND THE TALK: TAKING ACTION

to EDUCATE EVERY CHILD NOW

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Introduction ........................................... 5

II. Strategic Plan Summary ......................... 6

III. Process Overview .................................. 10

IV. Board of Education Scorecard ................ 15V. Milestones............................................. 27

VI. Glossary of Terms .................................. 33

VII. SERR Participant Demographics ............ 51



SFUSD MISSION

The mission of the San Francisco Unified School District is to provide each student

with an equal opportunity to succeed by promoting intellectual growth, creativity,

self-discipline, cultural and linguistic sensitivity, democratic responsibility, economic

competence, and physical and mental health so that each student can achieve his or

her maximum potential.

SFUSD GOALS

Access and Equity Make social justice a reality.

Student Achievement Engage high achieving and joyful learners.

Accountability Keep our promises to students and families.



SF BOARD OF EDUCATION

Mark Sanchez, President

Kim-Shree Maufas, Vice President

Jane Kim

Eric Mar, Esq.

Hydra Mendoza

Jill Wynns

Norman Yee

SFUSD SUPERINTENDENT

Carlos A. Garcia

SFUSD DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT

FOR INSTRUCTION, INNOVATION AND SOCIAL JUSTICE

Tony Smith

SFUSD DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT

FOR POLICY AND OPERATIONS

Myong Leigh

Version 1 of the 2008-2012 Strategic Plan was adopted by the SF Board of Education on May 27, 2008.The Strategic Plan is a dynamic document that will be revisited, updated and revised periodically.



I. INTRODUCTION

The mission of the San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) is to provide each student with an

equal opportunity to succeed by promoting intellectual growth, creativity, self-discipline, cultural and

linguistic sensitivity, democratic responsibility, economic competence, and physical and mental health

so that each student can achieve his or her maximum potential.

As described in our mission, we are committed to helping every student maximize her or his potential

while increasing the achievement of already high performing students and dramatically accelerating the

achievement of those who are currently less academically successful. The ideas and actions described

in this plan are focused on one main idea: every child has the right to be well-educated. Currently, no

urban education system in the United States fulfills this fundamental right. The political, emotional,

technical and strategic work necessary to create a system of high quality schools that prepare every stu-

dent for full and meaningful community participation in our 21st century global world is one of our

country’s greatest challenges. In San Francisco, a progressive city that holds itself in high regard as a political and intellectual leader, we exhibit some of the deepest racial, socio-economic and linguistic in-

equities in the United States.

For seven consecutive years San Francisco public schools have delivered a greater percentage of stu-

dents to academic proficiency levels than any other large urban district in California. At the same time,

the district’s achievement gap, the discrepancy between the academic proficiency of students by race,

ethnicity, class and language, has continued to widen. For far too long demographics, specifically the

socio-economic, linguistic and racial backgrounds of our children, have often closely correlated to their

success in school. We refer to this historical trend as

the “predictive power of demographics.”

Closing this unacceptable achievement gap will re-

quire significant changes in our capacity to teach

culturally and linguistically diverse students effec-

tively. These changes demand that we relinquish

pretense and embrace the simple truth that we all

have to learn how to do this work better: from the

Board Room to the classroom. The actions de-

scribed in our plan require each one of us in theSFUSD to recognize our strengths, identify our

areas of growth, and take full responsibility for di-

minishing the predictive power of demographics on

academic and social outcomes.

In the process of creating the District Scorecard, our

long range plan for SFUSD, we have listened to


The ideas and actions

described in this plan

are focused on one

main idea: every child

has the right to be

well-educated.



years of community input and analyzed a wide range of data. In a recent series of community conversa-

tions around the Student Enrollment, Recruitment and Retention Plan (SERR) co-led by SFUSD, the

San Francisco Education Fund, Parents for Public Schools, the Parent Advisory Council, and other com-

munity leaders, we heard from almost one thousand parents and students from all parts of the city. They

told us that quality schools are defined by engaging and challenging material, caring and committed

teachers, strong and visible leaders, and instruction modified to meet each child’s needs. They told usthat the district needed to share a proactive, clear and long-term plan for how we will ensure that every

school is a quality school. We agree.

We invite you to consider this plan, the District Scorecard, and we hope that it reflects your greatest as-

pirations. In addition, we are relying on our whole community to stay involved in, bring your assets to,

and take leadership for, the work described in this plan. The deep change called for and described in this

plan requires our whole community to re-think and learn what authentic partnerships that lead to the aca-

demic and social success of every student look like. As called for by a unanimous vote of the School

Board on April 22, 2008, with fantastic community support, in Resolution no.82-26A1, “Closing the

Achievement Gap in SFUSD,” our District Scorecard is transparent, measurable, and rooted in a deep

understanding of where we are and where we must go – THIS IS OUR CALL TO ACTION. From this

point forward you will see our progress every step of the way as we strive to keep our promises to stu-

dents and families to engage high achieving and joyful learners, and make social justice a reality.

II. STRATEGIC PLAN SUMMARY

Problem Statement – Two Competing TruthsSan Francisco has the highest average student performance of the large urban districts in California and

the widest gap between the district average and the lowest performing students.

Solution – Addressing the

Root Causes

The deep disparities in the

daily lives of our students and

families in the SFUSD mirror

a pattern that has developed

in the United States in the last

50 years. The United States

has emerged as the industrial-

ized society with the greatest




income and wealth inequality with a consequent increase in disparities in educational outcomes. Almost

one fourth of children live in poverty in the United Sates. Without honestly and effectively addressing

the need to educate EVERY child well, we will create a permanent underclass in the United States. The

effects of persistent racism, classism, and language bias are exacerbated by growing educational in-

equalities leading to worsening economic conditions for some families and poorer family health. We

know being well-educated makes a real difference in the life chances of our children. Therefore, the

SFUSD is committed to working on these root issues as we strive to create an organization that works

for all students and families.

There are no immediate or simple solutions to remedy the historic injustices described above. However,

by incorporating years of community input, taking an honest look at where we now stand, holding on-

going conversations with key partners, and building partnerships to share the work, we believe we have

a plan of action that immediately begins to address the root causes of the existing achievement gap.

To increase the achievement of ALL groups of students and dramatically accelerate the achievement of

targeted groups of students (African-American, English Learner, Latino, Pacific Islander, Samoan, andSpecial Education students) we are focused on three areas: Access and Equity, Achievement, and Ac-

countability.

Access & Equity

We believe access and equity are at the heart of making social justice a reality. The politics and ideol-

ogy of social justice are empty without daily actions that improve the living and learning conditions for

the children of San Francisco. Do our teachers have a broad range of teaching styles and skills to draw

on; are they fully aware of current research on human development; do they know their content deeply;

and are they able to know all groups of students, including our target groups (African-American, Eng-

lish Learner, Latino, Pacific Islander, Samoan, and Special Education students) while also knowing theunique gifts and talents of the individual? For some the answer is no. Our answer has to be YES, YES,

YES, YES! We must create an organization that ensures every student has access to these capable

teachers, and we must be an organization that knows and supports teachers. Authentic access and equity

will exist when our families, students and teachers report that they are clear about what is expected and

have the support they need to meet those expectations.

Achievement

Without a district of highly engaged and joyful learners we will have failed to live our mission. Our

picture of achievement is every student graduating ready and fully prepared for college and careers with

the skills/capacities required for successful 21st century citizenship. We must create learning environ-

ments in our schools, and throughout our city, that foster caring and innovation so that our students are

prepared to transform our world, rather than accept the status quo and existing inequities.

Accountability

We believe accountability for the work described in our plan requires personal commitment. We will

keep our promises to students and families and enlist everyone in the community to join us in doing so.




The Board and staff of the SFUSD promise to create the adequate conditions for every student to reach

her or his potential in each school and district-wide. In the words of Superintendent Carlos Garcia, “We

will do whatever it takes to ensure that we have adequate funding and support for every student to meetthe high expectations we’ve described in our plan.” To foster the accountability we’re calling for in this

plan, district staff and community will need to work closely together to describe what those “high expec-

tations” are in every part of SFUSD.

In an age of testing, measuring, and mandating, San Francisco Unified School District is calling for rela-

tional accountability. While we will continue to lead the country in our use and development of thought-

ful metrics, we are equally committed to developing new relationships that put students, families and

community at the center and ask us to keep pretense, personal agendas and egos to the side. We are

striving for the genuine accountability you feel when you promise someone you love, or care deeply

about, that you will do something that is important to her or him.

Implementation - Everyone taking initiative

To begin the mammoth undertaking of school, district, and community transformation we have three dis-

crete initiatives to organize our efforts. We know we need to increase the personal and professional ca-

pacity of every employee in SFUSD. We believe all our work must be equity-centered. And we are

determined to transform our curriculum in order to truly prepare our students for today and tomorrow.

Performance Management Initiative

Building on the idea that everyone, from students to the superintendent, must have sufficient resources,information, and support to have efficacy in their endeavors, SFUSD is designing and implementing a

comprehensive system of performance management. We believe this system is necessary to create the

culture of leadership for equity in support of the objectives described in our District Scorecard. The per-

formance management initiative will focus our conversations on District Scorecard data – so that all

staff know and understand their role in supporting student achievement, are provided the support and

professional development required for success in their roles, and have voice and power in adjusting the

plan over time. Our initial phase of work is increasing the leadership capacity of district managers to


Academic Performance Index (2006) by subgroups in California’s largest urban districts. Color codes highlight

highest and second-highest performing subgroups and lowest and second-lowest performing subgroups.



support and manage staff and to ensure the high quality implementation of the site, department and dis-

trict level scorecards.

Equity-Centered Professional Learning Initiative

Creating and sustaining professional learning communities is essential to the pursuit of equity in our

classrooms, our schools and our district. Board members, staff, students, families and our partners need

to ask hard questions, look honestly at inequitable practices and policies, hold ourselves accountable

like we would with those we care most about, and embrace the uncertainties and tensions inevitably in-

volved in equity-centered change. This initiative will increase equity-centered conditions and structures

within SFUSD so that we can deliberately and explicitly challenge all forms of inequity, learn from eachother, and celebrate our accomplishments.

21st Century Curriculum Initiative

From straight-A students to students who are pushed out of the education system, what we’re teaching is

not keeping pace with our kids' aspirations. We are educating children to a world that doesn’t exist any-

more. Learning a second or third language is required in other countries like China, where students often

begin language study in elementary school. Will all of our students be prepared to address the deepest

social and political issues facing our country if we don’t change what we are teaching our schools? Will

all of our students be prepared to work with people from other countries or to open businesses abroad?

San Francisco and the American public recognize the urgency to move our education system into the

21st century. We must better prepare all of our students to succeed in and shape an increasingly compet-

itive world, one already divided by socio-economics, language, and race. Our district cannot accomplish

this work with a 20th century education model that uses a one-size-fits-all approach to learning, offers a

diluted and narrow curriculum, and tests students using limited assessment systems like those found

under No Child Left Behind.




SFUSD believes a 21st century education should build on a foundation of personalized, relevant learn-

ing that is meaningful and engaging for each student. We know our students must learn from and collab-

orate with diverse peers of different races, religions and origins. For truly socially conscious and

globally competitive students, we must also embed 21st century learning, such as technological literacy

and critical and creative thinking skills, in all the subjects that compose this broader, more rigorous cur-riculum.

III. PROCESS OVERVIEW

Community Input & Key Data that informed this plan

The goals and objectives of “Beyond the Talk” build on a seven-year legacy of strong planning that re-

sulted in steady academic performance growth for all groups of students. Former superintendent Arlene

Ackerman instituted the five year “Excellence for All” plan in 2000, which made important improve-

ments to the ways that school site budgets were developed, using Weighted Student Formula site-based

budgeting. “Excellence for All” also spearheaded the creation of the Dream and STAR schools initia-

tives for closing the achievement gap at low-performing schools. These initiatives yielded improved ac-

ademic performance in the aggregate though seldom at the rate of acceleration needed to raise overall

performance and close the wide gap in achievement.

Also during this time, the district began a Secondary School Redesign Initiative (SSRI). In 2001, the

District convened task forces to address the fact that San Francisco’s middle schools and high schools

fail to adequately serve a large proportion of our students. Identifying significant concerns with

achievement, attendance, dropout rates, graduation rates, college going rates and other indicators of stu-dent success, these broad-based task forces developed research-based guiding principles for change and

articulated four key elements of success for secondary students.

The four key elements that grew out of the Secondary School Redesign Initiative established the basis

0 BEYOND THE TALK: TAKING ACTION to EDUCATE EVERY CHILD NOW



for creating new, and improving existing, sec-

ondary schools:

• Personalization. Schools need to create

learning communities in which students are

known by all adults.

• Academic Rigor. All students need access

to a rigorous academic curriculum and high

quality instruction, based on content and per-

formance standards.

• Opportunities to Apply Learning. All stu-

dents need to have learning in context and to

have academic learning linked with prepara-

tion for post-secondary education and for a

high-skill economy.

• Access to Powerful Teaching. Schools must

create environments that allow well-prepared

teachers to continually reflect on and im-

prove their practice.

The SSRI sought to create schools characterized by these elements of success, in order to

meet five goals:

• Increase choices for families and provide effective schools where students need them• Improve student achievement: raise the bar and close the gap

• Increase student engagement

• Increase community and stakeholder support

• Transform central office to be a service center

We are continuing these efforts and building on this strong foundation with our District Scorecard.

In March of 2006, during interim superintendent Gwen Chan’s tenure, the Board of Education called for

a new long range planning process called the Student Enrollment Recruitment and Recruitment (SERR)

Initiative to support closing the achievement gap, provide all students equitable access to high-quality

education in integrated learning environments, and sustain and build student enrollment to strengthen

the district’s fiscal condition.

The district, in partnership with the San Francisco Education Fund, the Parent Advisory Committee to

the Board of Education and Parents for Public Schools, led a community engagement initiative to un-

derstand the values, hopes and goals of the San Francisco community in relation to public schools.


From this point forward you will

see our progress every step of th

way as we strive to keep our

promises to students and familie

to engage high achieving and

joyful learners, and make social

justice a reality.



These conversations about public schools happened in a different way than most previous community

input sessions; they took place in small intimate groups of 8 to 15 people in every corner of the city with

racially and linguistically diverse participants reflective of both the diversity of our schools and our city.

The input of the 900 parents, students and community members who took part in the SERR community

conversations has also been an important foundation for the development of “Beyond the Talk.”

In August 2007, at the beginning of Superintendent Carlos Garcia’s tenure, the superintendent and Board

of Education convened to set shared priorities for the district. At these retreats the Board and superin-

tendent unanimously agreed that student achievement, and specifically, closing the achievement gap

while continuing to elevate the performance of all students, was the most important focus for the district

for the next five years.

Community recommendations gathered over the last seven years, current district metrics on student

achievement and retention, and the bold vision of the current Board of Education have all played an im-

portant role in shaping the goals, objectives and initiatives of the District Scorecard.

The Balanced Scorecard (cascading, specific, measurable, assigned to goal owners)

When the district set out to create the framework that will guide our future work over the next five years,

we chose a different strategy than was used in the past. We wanted to ensure that we didn’t create a plan

that was only read once and then placed on a shelf to collect dust. We wanted a plan that was visionary

enough that we could stay focused on our goals over the long haul while still having enough flexibility

to incorporate ongoing feedback.

“The Balanced Scorecard,” is a strategic management system that translates vision into specific metrics

developed by Robert Norton and David Kaplan (1996). In order to create and sustain a district of highquality schools we needed a plan to guide our strategic investment in our people, our systems and our

procedures. Our aspiration is to develop the self-sufficiency and optimism in SFUSD that will ensure

that we continue to meet new challenges as our schools and our city change and grow. We wanted to de-

velop a clear plan that uses multiple measures of our progress that is easily updated and accessible to the

whole community.

Finally, and most importantly, we wanted a plan that would hold each and every individual in our

schools and community accountable for creating the best outcomes for children. That is why we chose

the Balanced Scorecard, a framework for translating strategy into action. The district is in the first phase

of a multi-year effort to create new systems centered on Access and Equity, Achievement, and Accounta-

bility, the three primary goals of this plan. Within the year, each district stakeholder group, from the

Board of Education to individual school sites, will have a scorecard. We are calling this the cascading

process; every part of the organization creating a scorecard that describes its share of the work to

achieve our desired outcomes. The Board of Education Scorecard (BSC 1) is the compass for the dis-

trict; it sets the overall direction. The District Scorecard (BSC 2) is the map for district administrators; it




has the same measures as the BOE Scorecard plus additional measures that will serve as a day to day

guide.

These two scorecards are just the first step. The most important scorecards are at the school site level.

The School Site Scorecards are where each school community will describe their goals, objectives and

initiatives. Over the next year, the district will work with staff, students, families and community to cre-ate shared understanding of our efforts and to develop the systems necessary to support each school

community. This work is at the heart of the central office becoming a true service organization.

The School Quality, Equity and Access Matrix – how does it work, why have one,

and what will it tell us?

Across the nation and especially in San Francisco, there is a trend for some groups of students to per-

form better on standardized tests and to graduate from high school more prepared to pursue college and

careers of choice than other groups of students. The San Francisco Unified School District believes our

success should be determined by our ability to increase the current achievement of all groups of students

and to dramatically accelerate the achievement of targeted groups of students who are currently less aca-

demically successful.

Therefore, with the implementation of our strategic plan, we will measure school quality, and overall

district performance, in a new way: how well each school serves each and every student based on that

school’s ability to disrupt the historically predictive power of racial, ethnic, linguistic and socio-eco-

nomic student attributes.

The School Quality, Equity and Access Matrix provides a simple visual model of complex data to assist

families, school sites and district policy-makers in exploring important differences among the district’sschools. The matrix reveals trends and practices worth celebrating and will direct intervention with

greater accuracy on behalf of its lowest performers. The more precisely an intervention addresses a

school’s individual needs and builds on its strengths, the more effectively available resources are uti-

lized and the greater the chances of creating sustained improvement in student outcomes.

To date, the assessment of student performance is anchored in the absolute performance of schools and

districts on the California STAR tests, known as the Academic Performance Index (API). While setting

and monitoring the state’s standards and goals, the API offers only limited intelligence on how to reach

higher performance levels through targeted interventions and supports.

A second dimension of school performance is measured through the School Quality, Equity and Access

Matrix – relative peer-to-peer performance –and provides a much needed complementary perspective.

This dimension is captured by benchmark analytics that adjust statistically for each school’s demo-

graphic context and other starting conditions. In doing so, benchmarks level the playing field for mean-

ingful school-to-school comparisons.




Truly meaningful school-to-school comparisons

distinguish those low performers that have least

managed to disrupt the historically predictive

power of socio-economic student attributes –

and, on the upside, to pinpoint even among low

performers the emerging lighthouses that are beating the district trend by a wide margin.

The matrix illustrates two dimensions of absolute

performance and relative benchmarks. Each data

point in this chart represents a SFUSD school.

The top-to-bottom benchmark gaps represent the

school’s performance on California Standards

Tests (CSTs). The left-to-right benchmark gaps

represent the degree to which a school has man-

aged to positively disrupt the predictive power of

its starting conditions.

Imagine being able to “play a movie,” in which

progress can be measured over time, from dis-

trict-wide performance, right down to individual

schools. Trends will become more visible, and

practices that are having a positive effect will be-

come more evident. As we learn what’s working

well we’ll share it broadly with our whole com-munity.

That is what we at SFUSD intend to do: shed

light on and multiply the best practices in our

midst – the schools that are beating the odds for

every student regardless of race, ethnicity, eco-

nomic status, disability, English language status,

parental education, migrant status or gender.


Benchmark Gap-20 -10 0 10 20

C S T ( % C

o r r e c t A n s w e r s )

0

1 0

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

8 0

9 0

1 0 0

School B:SFUSD Challenge

Free/Reduced: 80%EL Learner: 23%

School A:SFUSD Lighthouse

Free/Reduced: 81%EL Learner: 25%

SFUSD Matrix: Shown are all SFUSD Ele-

mentary Schools in a preliminary illustra-

tion. The top-to-bottom scale represents

the schools’ performance on California

State standards tests at a given grade

level. The left-to-right benchmark gaps

represent the degree to which a school

has managed to positively disrupt the pre-

dictive power of the demographic vari-

ables that are monitored in the School

Quality, Equity and Access Matrix. High-

lighted is the performance of two schools

with similar proportions of English Learn-

ers and students with Free or Reduced

Lunch – two highly predictive variables –

but with drastically different relative as

well as absolute outcomes.




IV. BOARD OF EDUCATION SCORECARD

The Board of Education Scorecard (BSC 1) is the compass for the

district, it sets the overall direction. The BSC 1 has been approved

and adopted by the Board of Education and will guide the develop-

ment of district level, department and school site scorecards.




V. Strategic Plan Milestones

One, three, and five year work targets are essential components to

any high quality strategic plan. It is imperative that we both knowwhere we’re going and how we will get there. Through doing the

work described here, we will create the public schools that all San

Francisco’s children, families, and communities deserve.




VI. Strategic Plan Milestones

Board of Education Milestones for Years One, Three and Five

YEAR ONE Adopt an equity-centered Strategic Plan to provide direction and strategic leadership.

Provide clear and unified message to full district and community that the BSC is the foundation for all

SFUSD work.

Begin using the BSC as a decision making and agenda creation tool; planning sessions to create shared

meaning and processes for BSC.

Align policies and practices to strategic goals.

Create a set of guiding agreements for the Board that ensures a safe, affirming and enriched environment

for each Board member.

Induct new Board members using the BSC.

Conduct Board Retreat to review and refine implementation.

Evaluate the Superintendent using the BSC.

Direct the superintendent to base staff evaluations on the BSC.

Base end of the year evaluation on percentage of Board agenda items and time spent directly related to

BSC 1.

YEAR THREE

Review annually the percentage of BSC 1 targets met and use as the foundation for Board Retreat.

Create year-long course of action, review and study based on the BSC.

YEAR FIVE

Assess board effectiveness and leadership locally and nationally based on pursuit of BSC goals, objec-

tives and measures.




Central Office Milestones for Years One, Three and Five

YEAR ONE

Publish working draft of Strategic Plan & working draft of BSC 2 and glossary.

Finalize School Quality, Equity, and Access Matrix.

Host one-to-ones with BOE members and Union leadership (preview implications for bargaining) aboStrategic Plan and Matrix.

Host key “Allies” (City, CBO, Community groups) to review and discuss the Strategic Plan draft.

Use feedback from the BOE and other key stakeholders to prepare final Strategic Plan for

Board Adoption.

Work with departmental and cross-departmental teams to identify challenges and opportunities in coll

tive bargaining agreements.

Create targeted Professional Development on creating a School Site Scorecard tied to BSC 1 for schoo

site leaders that models an authentic learning and creating process (principal, teacher leaders, union

building reps, family reps, student).

Produce and publish employee and community information about the Matrix and the strategic plan (w

site, print, etc.).

Translate board approved strategic plan documents.

Develop the technology platform required to support the new data and communication standard de-

scribed in the BSC.

Develop the student and staff information system to analyze impact of BSC on students and schools;

allow for correlations between student achievement and staff action.

Develop Professional Development for central office staff that fosters the skills, dispositions and know

edge required to use the Matrix.

Develop Interest-Based bargaining Professional Development for central office staff. Convene core site leadership group to design differentiated Professional Development for administrato

and sites for ’08 –’09 school year.

Begin Central Office Professional Development using the Matrix and BSC 2 to guide departmental an

cross-departmental work.

Conduct Administrators’ Professional Development: Leadership for Equity, Creating

School Site Scorecards.

Seek Foundation support to strengthen and support the SFUSD strategic plan.

Create a partnership review Matrix and MOU process based on the BSC.

Draft School Site Scorecard tuning and support meetings.

Design and implement staff evaluation protocols aligned to BSC.

Develop employee induction to orient them to the BSC and to provide support during their first two ye

as employees.

Initiate a process for aligning all existing and new master plans to the BSC.




YEAR THREE

Make available fully cascaded Balanced Scorecards that are accessible and well-understood by SFUSD

and SF community. Ensure that school site Scorecards demonstrate significant increases overall and dramatic acceleration of

sub-groups in academic performance.

Ensure that the SFUSD School Quality, Equity and Access Matrix shows a significant positive trend in

positive school effect.

Embed BSC and District Matrix in SFUSD communications (regular updates on the web, in

publications etc.).

Design EPC to balance choice with the Matrix and BSC framework for student assignment (a predictable

system with high quality choices for everyone).

Integrate the information and assessment system (technology and research) into decision making at all

levels of the organization.

Use the District Matrix internally and externally to determine progress and to organize site-based needs

& support.

Design central office based on community feedback in order to best serve students, families and schools.

Ensure that SFUSD curriculum has a new framework and a two year plan for total conversion.

Ensure that all district partners operate with clear agreements and performance metrics connected di-

rectly to the BSC.

Align resources (money, people and materials) to support the work described in the BSC.

Create demonstration sites, Professional Development sites and shared materials through use of the Ma-

trix – standards for use of successful sites/classrooms. Ensure that SFUSD has a network of high functioning, well-integrated community schools that are con-

sidered community assets and anchors of positive civic development.

YEAR FIVE

Ensure that SFUSD is recognized as a leading district in closing the achievement gap and preparing stu-

dents for success in the 21st century.

Produce five year evaluation of the Performance Management, Equity Centered Professional Learning

and the 21st Century Curriculum Initiatives.

Prepare updates and expansions of BSC 1 for School Board review.

Adopt five year strategic plan. Ensure that the San Francisco community feels that SFUSD is transparent and accountable.

Central Office Milestones for Years One, Three and Five (con’t)




School Site Milestones for Years One, Three and Five

YEAR ONE

Review outline of a plan to create a School Site Scorecard & convene school groups to draft site plan

create Scorecard.

Hold school-wide Professional Development and discussion on creating a School Site Scorecard.

Create, develop and review draft of School Site Scorecard, then a complete Scorecard.

Develop school-wide assessment tool to measure progress based on measures identified in the School

Site Scorecard.

Assess school-wide progress based on measures named in the School Site Scorecard.

Develop final draft of School Site Scorecard tuning and support.

YEAR THREE

Utilize School Site Scorecards as the primary tool for new staff induction, leadership team work, profe

sional development, school site council and student leadership groups. Report data in measures that are widely known and deeply understood in each school community.

YEAR FIVE

Identify and share practices that are getting positive results.

Post, discuss and use Matrix performance trends to guide growth plans at each school site.




City and Community Milestones for Years One, Three and Five

YEAR ONE

Work with SFUSD to use the BSC to review planned work and assess degree of shared purpose and

work.

Describe the support parents, families, community groups need to participate in “Beyond the Talk.”

Name specific areas of concern and action.

Orient school site participation and work around the creation of a School Site Scorecard.

Discuss schools as community assets in community meetings.

Meet with the Mayor and department heads re: BSC and Matrix.

Review citywide efforts to serve youth and families using the BSC as a filter.

Encourage public conversation on education: “It Takes a City.”

Share in the responsibility of drop out prevention.

YEAR THREE Ensure full service community schools are neighborhood and community anchors for positive

civic engagement.

YEAR FIVE

Ensure community based organizations use a Balanced Scorecard approach to assess their

effectiveness.




VI. Glossary of Terms

The District Scorecard is a school district tool to assist in our re-

design efforts. The contents were developed by education profes-

sionals in partnership with community stakeholders. Some of the

language in the plan is specific to education and may be difficult for

people who have not studied or worked in the field of education to

understand. This glossary attempts to define some of the terms con-

tained in this document to make the work more accessible to the

whole community.




A-G Course Requirements

These are the courses that students must pass in order to be eligible for admittance to any of the Univer-

sity of California campuses or any of the California State Universities:

a. History/Social Science – 2 years

b. English – 4 years

c. Mathematics – 3 years

d. Laboratory Science – 2 yearse. World Languages – 2 years

f. Visual and Performing Arts – 1 year

g. Other College Preparatory – 1 year

Advanced Placement (AP)

The Advanced Placement (AP) program offers college-level courses in high school. The courses are de-

signed to prepare students for annual AP Exams. Through AP Exams, students have the opportunity to

earn credit or advanced standing at most of the nation's colleges and universities.

Many high schools in the United States offer AP courses, but any student is allowed to take the exami-

nation without participating in an AP course. Home-schooled students and students from schools that do

not offer AP courses have an equal opportunity to take the examination.

The AP program is run by the College Board, a non-profit organization that develops and maintains 37

college-level courses and exams across 22 subject areas. The College Board supports teachers of AP

courses, supports universities as they define their policies regarding AP grades, and develops and coor-

dinates the administration of annual AP examinations.

AP tests are scored differently from the A-F grading scale common in the United States. They are scoredon a numeric scale, 1 to 5, with a score of 3 considered passing and the following general meanings:

• 5: Extremely well-qualified

• 4: Well-qualified

• 3: Qualified

• 2: Possibly qualified

• 1: No recommendation

These scores are graded on a curve; students are scored relative to other test-takers rather than on a set

standard. These scorings are used by some colleges to exempt students from introductory coursework.

Each college's policy is different, but most accept scores of 4 or 5, and some accept scores of 3.

Colleges and universities vary in their approach to indicating AP credit on college transcripts. AP activi-

ties are funded through fees charged to students taking AP Exams. As of the 2008 testing season, exams

cost $84 each, though the cost may be subsidized by local or state programs.




Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID)

An in-school academic support program for grades 4-12 that prepares students for college eligibility and

success.

Balanced Scorecard (BSC)

The balanced scorecard (BSC) is a strategic planning and management system used to align business ac-

tivities to the vision and strategy of the organization, improve internal and external communications, and

monitor organizational performance against strategic goals.

Baseline Data

Baseline data is basic information gathered before a program begins. It’s our starting point. We use thisdata as a comparison for assessing the impact of a program over time.

Baseline Technology Standards

The technology infrastructure and support needed to support learning and decision-making in SFUSD

schools. This includes, but is not limited to, standards for high-speed network connectivity, adequate

bandwidth, network hardware, servers, computers, software, peripheral tools, training, and technical

support. The baseline technology standards are defined in the current Education Technology Master

Plan and will be updated in the December 2008 Technology Master Plan.

BasicReferring to an achievement level on the California Standards Tests, BASIC refers to the middle level,

below PROFICIENT and above BELOW BASIC.

Below Basic

Referring to an achievement level on the California Standards Tests, BELOW BASIC is the second low-

est level, above FAR BELOW BASIC and below BASIC.




Benchmark

A standard used for comparison.

California English Language Development Test (CELDT)

This test is California’s formal assessment of a student’s proficiency of English status across several do-

mains. The performance of English Learners on this test determines a district’s status in meeting lan-guage proficiency targets for its students.

California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE)

The CAHSEE is a test created by the California Department of Education. All California high school

students are required to pass the exam in order graduate. The exam tests students in the areas of read-

ing, writing, and mathematics.

California Standards Tests (CSTs)

The state of California has adopted academic standards which describe what students should know and

be able to do in each grade and subject. CSTs measure how much progress a student is making towards

those standards. Results of these tests are used to determine if a school/district has met state and federal

accountability requirements.

Career Pathways

A coherent sequence of rigorous academic and technical courses that prepare students for successful

completion of state academic standards, while supporting their transition to more advanced post second-

ary coursework related to a career area of interest

Caring and Supportive RelationshipsFostering caring and supportive relationships in school is a way of relating to youth, their families, and

each other that conveys compassion, understanding, respect and interest. It includes seeing possibilities

in each child and using one’s wisdom of the heart. Truly listening to a youth’s story is a powerful signal

that an adult believes and accepts and cares about the youth. Creating a school wide climate of caring

means staff, too, must have collegial support networks. One of the most critical factors of fostering a

positive school culture is the approach and tone of the teacher. Students who believe their teachers care

about them perform better academically.

Cognitive Engagement

Students are cognitively engaged when they give sustained, engaged attention to a task requiring mental

effort. The highest form of cognitive engagement is self-regulated learning (Corno & Mandinach,

1983), where learners plan and manage their own learning and have a high degree of personal control

and autonomy. A learner’s cognitive engagement and her or his motivation are inextricably linked to-

gether. The amount of cognitive effort expended by the learner is an appropriate measure of her or his

motivation as it relies on the learner focusing on mastering the learning task and maintaining a high

sense of personal efficacy (Shunk, 1989). Self-regulated learning is critical to beginning and ongoing

motivation as students engage in specific cognitive activities that derive from the novelty of the learning




environment that allows the students to establish different perspectives that relate back to their own

world views.

Communities of Practice (CoP)

A community of practice is a group of individuals participating in communal activity, and experienc-

ing/continuously creating their shared identity through engaging in and contributing to the practices of their communities. The concept of the community of practice comes from the understanding that learn-

ing can be conceptualized as social participation – the individual as an active participant in the practices

of social communities, and in the construction of his/her identity through these communities.

Community-Based Organization (CBO)

An organization operated by a non-profit agency, community coalition, local city, or other public organi-

zation which has as its mission services to people within the community.

Community Service

A service that a person performs for the benefit of his or her local community, usually without compen-

sation.

Core Curriculum

In education, a core curriculum is a curriculum, or course of study, which is deemed central and usually

made mandatory for all students of a school or school system. Core curricula are often instituted, at the

primary and secondary levels, by school boards, Departments of Education, or other administrative

agencies charged with overseeing education. In California, core curriculum includes language arts,

mathematics, science, history/social science, visual and performing arts, and world languages.




Culturally & Linguistically Responsive

A culturally and linguistically responsive classroom is one that recognizes the impact students’ home

language and culture has on their education and, thus, provides a culturally and linguistically supported

learning environment to enable all students to succeed. Culturally and linguistically responsive teaching

is student-centered: the strengths students bring to school are identified, nurtured, and utilized to pro-

mote student achievement.

Culturally and linguistically responsive pedagogy comprises three dimensions: (a) institutional, (b) per-

sonal, and (c) instructional. The institutional dimension reflects the administration and its policies and

values. The personal dimension refers to the cognitive and emotional processes teachers must engage in

to become culturally and linguistically responsive. The instructional dimension includes materials,

strategies, and activities that form the basis of instruction. All three dimensions significantly interact in

the teaching and learning process and are critical to understanding the effectiveness of culturally and

linguistically responsive pedagogy.

Desegregation

In the desegregation of the district, San Francisco was ordered by a federal court to eliminate racial and

ethnic identifiability in schools, programs, and classrooms. The goal was to prevent, reduce, or elimi-

nate racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic segregation of students and to promote academic achievement

and educational opportunity for all students.

Digital Divide

The term digital divide refers to the gap between those people with effective access to digital and infor-

mation technology and those without access to it. It includes the imbalances in physical access to tech-

nology as well as the imbalances in resources and skills needed to effectively participate as a digitalcitizen.

Digital Resources

Digital resources include books and other materials available in digital formats (as opposed to print, mi-

croform, or other media) and accessible by computers. The digital content may be stored locally, or ac-

cessed remotely via computer networks. A digital library is a type of information retrieval system.

DREAM Schools

Dream Schools, initiated under the SFUSD Improvement Plan Excellence for All, include a vision of

student success and opportunity that focus on college connections, academic achievement, engaging in-

structional models, student support system, varied learning experiences and parents empowerment. The

program includes a longer instructional day for students and other targeted resources, including those

described in the STAR Initiative, with expanded library, visual and performing arts, and student support

staff (a nurse and learning support professional).




SFUSD has six Dream Schools: Dr. Charles R. Drew Elementary (Pre-K to 3), Willie Brown

Academy (grades 4-8), Sanchez Elementary, Everett Middle School, John O’Connell High

School of Technology and Paul Revere K-8. In addition, Thurgood Marshall High School offers

a Dream Academy for 9-10th graders.

Dropout

Various ways of calculating the dropout rate reveal different ways of thinking about the issue.

Event rate indicates the number of students who leave high school each year and is compared

with previous years. Status rate, a cumulative rate much higher than the event rate, denotes the

proportion of all individuals in the population who have not completed high school and were not

enrolled at a given point in time. Cohort rate describes the number of dropouts from a single age

group or specific grade (or cohort) of students over a period of time. The high school completion

rate indicates the percentage of all persons ages 21 and 22 who have completed high school by

receiving a high school diploma or equivalency certificate.

The following factors lead to unreliable aggregated national dropout figures:

• different definitions of dropouts

• different time periods during the school year when dropout data are collected

• different data collection methods

• different ways of tracking youth no longer in school different methods used by school districts

and states to calculate the dropout rate, result in unreliable aggregated national dropout figures

Effort Optimism

Effort optimism refers to how strongly a student believes that hard work/effort in school will pay

off with academic/school success. A strong conviction generally results in greater success, andcan become a self-fulfilling prophecy, reinforcing that belief. When the conviction is weak or

nonexistent, generally students experience less success, and this reinforces the belief that effort

doesn’t matter.

English Learners

English Learners are students who are speakers of another language and are in the process of

learning English. The goal of SFUSD is for English Learners to learn both English and their

home language to high levels, to meet grade level content standards for promotion, graduation,

and college entrance, and to develop the skills, competencies, and dispositions necessary for suc-

cess in the 21st century.

Equity-Centered Professional Development

Professional development that incorporates social justice issues in teaching and education, in-

cluding attention to fairness and equity with regard to gender, race, class, disability, sexual orien-

tation, etc.




Gifted & Talented Education

The mission of Gifted and Talented Education Programs is to provide challenging and engaging learning

experiences and opportunities for growth that enable children with high potential, talent, and excep-

tional capacity to develop to their potential. In SFUSD, we believe that every student possesses visible

and invisible talents, and we see our role as supporting the full development of those talents.

Grade Level Standards

A criterion is set up for standards of what every student or child is expected to know, and a score is com-

pared to these benchmarks rather than a ranking compared to a norm. It is fully expected that every

child will become proficient in all areas of academic skills by the end of a period, typically 10 years but

sometimes longer, after the passing of education reform bill by a state legislature. The federal govern-

ment, under No Child Left Behind can further require that all schools must demonstrate improvement

among all students, even if they are already all over proficient.

Graphic Resources

Graphic resources include photos, illustrations, clipart, images, icons, maps, charts, tables, and other vi-

sual resources.

High and Equitable Student Achievement

High and equitable student achievement requires dramatically improved educational experiences, out-

comes, and life options for students and families who have been historically underserved by their

schools and districts. It involves providing students that chance to succeed, either by having more quali-

fied teachers or smaller classes, or both.

Identity Investment A student’s sense of self-identity is greatly shaped by her or his school environment. She or he is much

more likely to be engaged in school when that environment reinforces a positive self-image.

Societal power relations influence the ways in which educators define their roles (teacher identity) and

the structures of schooling (curriculum, funding, assessment, etc.) which, in turn, influence the ways in

which educators interact with linguistically- and culturally-diverse students. These interactions form an

interpersonal space within which learning happens and identities are negotiated. These identity negotia-

tions either reinforce coercive relations of power or promote collaborative relations of power. To the ex-

tent that students are able to take ownership of school/community artifacts as a result of having invested

their identities in them, they will be more or less engaged in those schools and communities. These arti-

facts (written, spoken, visual, musical or combinations in multimodal form) hold a mirror up to the stu-

dent in which his or her identity is reflected back in a positive light. These artifacts then become

ambassadors of students’ identities. When students share these artifacts with multiple audiences (peers,

teachers, parents, grandparents, sister classes, the media, etc.) they are likely to receive positive feed-

back and affirmation of self in interaction with these audiences.




Leadership Development

Traditionally, leadership development has focused on devel-

oping the leadership abilities and attitudes of a small group of

individuals. SFUSD intends to develop staff, student, and par-

ent/community leadership that is sufficiently broad and deep

both to successfully respond to the complex challenges andopportunities of the 21st century.

Level

With relation to the California Standards Tests, level is used

to denote a student’s performance. There are five levels: Far

Below Basic, Below Basic, Basic, Proficient, and Advanced.

Lived Experiences

Lived experience refers to what an individual, group, or community experiences for itself, rather than a

reality that may be determined by those outside of that individual, group, or community. It involves not

only the actual experiences themselves, but the meaning that the individual, group, or community makes

of those experiences or realities.

Measure

The quantity, size, weight, distance or capacity of a substance compared to designated standard

Parent Conferences

In SFUSD, teachers meet with parents at least two times a year, teachers to discuss their child’s

progress. These parent conferences often prove a valuable strategy for improving student classroom be-havior as well as enhancing learning.

Parent Engagement

Parent engagement requires two-way communication between school and home. Specifically, schools

can clearly articulate their expectations of parents and regularly communicate with parents about what

children are learning, suggesting what parents can do to help. School-home compacts, reading school-

home links, and explicit homework policies are examples of communication about expectations and

support for children’s learning. Schools can also provide opportunities for parents to talk with school

personnel about parents’ role in their children’s education through home visits, family nights, and well-

planned parent-teacher conferences and open houses. Schools can provide parent education based on the

role of parents in helping their children meet state learning standards. An ongoing conversation between

parents and teachers about the role of each in children’s learning is key to building the relationship and

understanding that enhances school performance. Finally, schools can engage parents and families in de-

cision-making and leadership development, helping them develop the skills they need to be powerful

advocates their children.




Participatory & Inclusive Learning

Schools have responsibilities to design and implement

learning experiences where all students are full mem-

bers of the school community and are entitled to the

opportunities and responsibilities that are available to

all students in the school, and that acknowledge andvalue difference, and enable students to demonstrate

personal, group, and community responsibility.

In these types of learning environments, students are

actively engaged in the learning process. At times, that

engagement is with themselves as part of reflection,

with their peers, or with the teacher. Participatory

learning involves higher order thinking, application, evaluation, synthesis, and creation. Essential skills

of participatory and inclusive learning include inquiry, reflection, meta-thinking, facilitation, communi-

cation, and coaching.

When participatory environments are also inclusive, diverse students are provided with instruction spe-

cially designed to meet their strengths, needs, and interests.

Performance Assessments

Performance assessment is a measure of assessment based on authentic tasks such as activities, exer-

cises, or problems that require students to show what they can do. Some performance tasks are designed

to have students demonstrate their understanding by applying their knowledge to a particular situation.

Performance Management System

Performance management is a systematic process by which an agency involves its employees in improv-

ing organizational effectiveness in the accomplishment of the Agency's mission and strategic goals.

The performance management process is used to communicate organizational goals and objectives, rein-

force individual accountability for meeting those goals, and track and evaluate individual and organiza-

tional performance results. It reflects a partnership in which managers share responsibility for

developing their employees in such a way that enables employees to make contributions to the organiza-

tion. It is a clearly defined process for managing people that will result in success for both the individual

and the organization. SFUSD will be developing a Performance Management System as part of its

strategic plan.

Personal Efficacy

Efficacy is the power to achieve a desired goal. Students with personal efficacy know that they have the

individual agency to control what is learned based on a belief in their abilities to apply effort and

achieve a goal. Teachers with personal efficacy know that they as individuals control what students learn

and achieve based on a belief in their abilities to successfully teach all students.




Post-Secondary Education and Training

Post-secondary education includes many kinds of education and training programs, technical college de-

gree and certification programs, apprenticeship experience, two and four year colleges, private trade

schools, and on-the-job training.

Predictive Power

The predictive power of a theory refers to its ability to generate testable predictions. In SFUSD, we talk

about the predictive power of demographics to explain the achievement gap that currently exists be-

tween groups of students, based on race/ethnicity, language, and class.

Preliminary SAT

The Preliminary SAT Test measures the skills of students which have developed over the course of their

education. These include:

• Critical reading skills

• Math problem-solving skills

• Writing skills

Print Resources

Print resources include books, magazines, journals, newspapers, posters, signs, and other environmental

print.

Professional Development

Professional development focuses on the skills, capacities, and dispositions required for maintaining or

improving staff’s ability to deliver, or support the delivery of, powerful teaching and learning. It can be

seen as training to keep current with changing technology and practices in a profession or in the conceptof lifelong learning. In SFUSD, developing and implementing a program of professional development is

often a function shared by the Human Resources and the Academics and Professional Development Di-

visions.

Professional Efficacy

Efficacy is the belief in one's capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to pro-

duce given attainments. Efficacy plays a central role in motivation because people expend effort based

on the effects they are expecting from their actions.

For example, people will be more inclined to take on a task if they believe they can succeed. What’s

more, people with high self-efficacy in a task are more likely to expend more effort, and persist longer,

than those with low efficacy. Low efficacy can lead people to believe tasks are harder than they actually

are. This often results in poor task planning, as well as increased stress. People with high efficacy often

take a wider picture of a task in order to take the best route of action. Efficacy also affects how people

respond to failure. A person with a high efficacy will attribute the failure to external factors, where a

person with low efficacy will attribute failure to low ability.




The term "teacher efficacy" has replaced the term of "teacher expectations." Eight dimensions to the de-

velopment of teacher efficacy have been identified:

1. A sense of personal accomplishment: The teacher must view the work as meaningful and important.

2. Positive expectations for student behavior and achievement: The teacher must expect students to

progress.3. Personal responsibility for student learning: The teacher accepts accountability and shows a willing-

ness to examine performance.

4. Strategies for achieving objectives: The teacher plans for student learning, sets goals for herself, and

identifies strategies to achieve them.

5. Positive affect: The teacher feels good about teaching, about self, and about students.

6. Sense of control: The teacher believes he can influence student learning.

7. Sense of common teacher/student goals: The teacher develops a joint venture with students to accom-

plish goals.

8. Democratic decision-making: The teacher involves students in making decisions regarding goals and

strategies.

Professional Learning School Networks (PLSN)

The Professional Learning School Networks are a new vehicle through which SFUSD will promote and

advocate for the serious redesign of schooling in San Francisco. Their fundamental goal is to assist in

creating and sustaining excellent schools that—in collaboration with their communities—help all stu-

dents reach high levels of learning. Believing that all students can and must be successful, SFUSD lead-

ership is committed to developing and supporting reform strategies that intentionally include schools

serving urban, minority, and low-income youth.

We anticipate that these Networks will provide professional learning opportunities, research based re-

sources, and other services dedicated to increasing the knowledge, understanding and practices of effec-

tive equity-centered schools among all SFUSD educators. They will create centers of inquiry focused on

transforming the existing system of rules, roles, and relationships that govern the way time, people,

space, knowledge, and technology are used in schools so that schools are organized around students and

the work students are expected to do, and so that families and communities provide children the support

necessary to ensure student success for the 21st century.

Proficient

Referring to an achievement level on the California Standards Tests, PROFICIENT is the second highest

level, above BASIC and below ADVANCED.

Program Improvement (PI)

All schools and local educational agencies (LEAs) that do not make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

are identified for PI under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. The NCLB Act requires all states to

implement statewide accountability systems based on challenging state standards in reading and mathe-

matics, annual testing for all students in grades 3-8, and annual statewide progress objectives ensuring




that all groups of students reach proficiency within 12 years. Assessment results are disaggregated by so

cioeconomic status, race, ethnicity, disability, and limited English proficiency to ensure that no group is

left behind. Local educational agencies (LEAs) and schools that fail to make adequate yearly progress

(AYP) toward statewide proficiency goals are subject to improvement and corrective action measures.

In California, Program Improvement (PI) is the formal designation for Title I-funded schools and LEAs

that fail to make AYP for two consecutive years.

Protocols

A protocol is the set of guidelines and conventions that defines HOW something is to happen. It allows

for multiple individuals or groups to follow an agreed-upon process with some degree of fidelity. Proto-

cols often include descriptors, indicators, and/or exemplars.

Racial, Ethnic, and Socioeconomic Integration

Brown v. Board of Education's promise of inclusive, integrated, high-quality schools for all of our na-

tion's children has never been more important. Yet in the 53 years since Brown, the nation, and SFUSD

specifically, has struggled to realize that promise. While real progress was made initially toward more

integrated and equitable education, over the last two decades the nation has witnessed disturbing levels

of resegregation across the country. This trend is evident in SFUSD, as well.

On June 28, 2007, the Supreme Court issued a sharply divided decision in Parents Involved in Commu-

nity Schools v. Seattle School District, that limited the ability of school districts to take account of race

to promote diversity and address racial isolation in their schools. While a majority of the Justices recog-

nized the critical importance of community efforts to promote diverse local schools and provide oppor-

tunities for children to learn, play and work together, the Court struck down particular aspects of the

Seattle and Louisville student assignment plans because they were not, in its view, sufficiently well de-signed to achieve those goals. But the Court did not – as some reported – rule out any and all considera-

tion of race in student assignment. In fact, a majority of Justices explicitly left the window open for

school districts to take race-conscious measures to

promote diversity and avoid racial isolation in

schools. This is significant import for SFUSD, given

in historical Consent Decree.

The San Francisco Consent Decree, or desegregation

(integration) plan, was approved by the court in 1983.

There were two primary goals: (1) To eliminate

racial/ethnic segregation or identifiability in any

SFUSD school, program, or classroom and to achieve

the broadest practicable distribution throughout the

system of students from the racial and ethnic groups

which comprise the student enrollment of the

SFUSD; and (2) to achieve academic excellence

throughout the SFUSD. To accomplish these goals it




was required that every school have at least four racial/ ethnic groups and that no racial or ethnic group

exceed 45% of the enrollment of any regular school or 40% of the enrollment of any alternative school.

Desegregation efforts did not yield sustainable change, though. The decline in enrollment of African

American students, for example, caused resegregation to result. Academic results also continue to show

wide disparities in achievement between ethnic groups. Only 31.8% of African American students whoentered the ninth grade in 2003 in a San Francisco high school received a San Francisco high school

diploma four years late in 2007. The percent of Latino students was 43.2 and the district performance

was 62.8 percent. Black and Latino students represent 75% of the students suspended, 80% of the stu-

dents in the juvenile justice system, 54% of students in Special Education, 68% of truant students, and

75% of the students enrolled in the lowest performing elementary schools.

In contrast they represent 8% of the students enrolled in the highest performing elementary schools, 9%

of students taking Advanced Placement examinations, 10% of students attending Lowell High School,

and 13% of students in the Gifted program.

Results-Oriented Cycles of Inquiry (ROCI)

Results-Oriented Cycle of Inquiry (ROCI) is a research-based, strategic, and integrated approach to

teaching and learning comprised of knowing the standards; diagnosing focal student needs; setting and

working toward long and short term learning goals; backward planning from standards and assessments;

nvesting students in their goals; teaching effectively; and, throughout, continuously analyzing data to

ensure learning goals are being met. SFUSD has identified this approach to professional learning and as

one of its key strategies for engaging teachers, coaches and school leaders in its school reform work.

Safe, Affirming & Enriched Environment One of our core principles asserts that we will create safe, affirming and enriched environments for par-

ticipatory and inclusive learning for every group of students. Characteristics of this type of learning en-

vironment include:

• staff who express a positive attitude about the diversity of the students and welcomes what students

bring from their backgrounds and homes into the classroom and life of the school;

• intentional classroom and school-wide strategies in place so that students and teachers learn to under-

stand and respect differences;

• policies, vision statements, activities, signs, and images on the walls that promote the value of diver-

sity, multiple languages and multiculturalism;

• strong, enforced bottom-line policies of zero tolerance for anti-immigrant, anti-bilingual, and racist

language and behavior;

• staff, and administration who are members of the major racial, language and cultural communities of

the students;

• staff and administrators who intervene with positive messages about worth and respect for diversity

whenever incidents occur where students devalue or express shame about their own culture & lan-

guage;




• classroom climate and curriculum that facilitate students exploring learning about, becoming comfort

able with, and building excitement about each other’s languages and cultures,;

• instructional strategies and pedagogy that emphasize cooperative and interactive learning.

Safe, Secure & Attractive Schools

Extensive research shows that in order to learn and be successful in school, children must be taught in asafe and healthy environment. This includes not only the school’s physical surroundings but also the

emotional, mental and social dimensions of the school’s atmosphere.

SAT Reasoning Test

The SAT is a three-hour examination that measures verbal and mathematical reasoning. Many colleges

and universities use SAT results as part of the data on which they base admissions decisions. The Col-

lege Board, a non-profit association based in New York City, runs the SAT program.

School Improvement Plans

A framework for analyzing problems, identifying underlying causes, and addressing instructional issue

in a school that has not made sufficient progress in student achievement.

A school is identified as a Program Improvement (PI) school after two consecutive years of not making

adequate yearly progress (AYP) as defined by the federal government. Schools advance in PI status unt

they are able to meet AYP for two consecutive years. Schools in PI must write a School Improvement

Plan to show how they will improve the quality of teaching and learning in the school.

School Quality, Equity and Access Matrix

In the future, SFUSD will measure school quality and overall district performance in a new way: howwell each school serves each and every student based on that school’s ability to disrupt the historically

predictive power of racial, ethnic, linguistic and socio-economic student attributes.

The School Quality, Equity and Access Matrix provides a simple visual model of complex data to assist

families, school sites, and district policy-makers in exploring important differences among the district’s

schools. The matrix reveals trends and practices worth celebrating and will direct intervention with

greater accuracy on behalf of its lowest performers. The more precisely an intervention addresses a

school’s individual needs and builds on its strengths, the more effectively available resources are utilize

and the greater the chances of creating sustained improvement in student outcomes.

To date, the assessment of student performance is anchored in the absolute performance of schools and

districts on the California STAR tests, known as the Academic Performance Index (API). While setting

and monitoring the state’s standards and goals, the API offers only limited intelligence on how to reach

higher performance levels through targeted interventions and supports.




A second dimension of school performance is measured through the Equity and Access Matrix – relative

peer-to-peer performance –and provides a much needed complementary perspective. This dimension is

captured by benchmark analytics that adjust statistically for each school’s demographic context and

other starting conditions. In doing so, benchmarks level the playing field for meaningful school-to-

school comparisons.

Truly meaningful school-to-school comparisons distinguish those low performers that have least man-

aged to disrupt the historically predictive power of socio-economic student attributes – and, on the up-

side, to pinpoint even among low performers the emerging lighthouses that are beating the district trend

by a wide margin.

Self Efficacy

Self-efficacy is defined as people's beliefs about their capabilities to produce designated levels of per-

formance. It is the belief that one is capable of performing in a certain manner or attaining certain goals.

Senior Leadership

In SFUSD, senior leadership includes the members of the Superintendent’s Cabinet and others at the Di-

rector level and above.

Standard Operating Procedures (SOP)

The term STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES is used to describe a procedure or set of proce-

dures to perform a given operation or evolution or in reaction to a given event.

STAR Schools

The STAR (Students and Teachers Achieving Results) Initiative is a district-designed support programfor low performing schools at the elementary, middle and high school levels. The STAR Initiative in-

creases the capacity for change at schools through additional instructional resources, school personnel

and district support. Four core beliefs shape the STAR Initiative:

• An underperforming school can become a school with high student achievement

• Strong leadership at the school site is a key component of whole school change

• Central office must position resources to support instructional improvement and access

at the school site

• Underperforming schools commonly have similar issues and concerns. Likewise, successful schools

share core elements that are linked to student achievement.

State-Monitored Status

There are two programs involving state monitoring: Immediate Intervention/Underperforming Schools

Program (II/USP) and High Priority Schools Grant Program (HPSGP). Schools in these programs did

not meet growth requirements of the program and were subsequently identified and deemed state-moni-

tored by the State Board of Education and the State Superintendent of Public Instruction. The schools




receive funds to contract with a School Assistance and Intervention Team (SAIT) Provider and imple-

ment required activities to improve student achievement with the goal of being removed from state-mo

itored status.

Student Government

It is a student-led organization that is committed to providing a voice for the students at the school siteand the district at large. The organization gathers issues and concerns directly from students and works

with the site administration or Board of Education and Superintendent. It is an opportunity for students

to develop and hone their leadership skills at the site level or district level.

Subgroup

Disaggregating academic achievement data by school level, grade, gender, ethnicity, programs is re-

ferred to as dividing the group into its subgroups. For example, the subgroups for school level are ele-

mentary school level, middle school level, high school level and K-8 school level, and all academic

achievement data can be further reported by specific school levels.

Support Programs & Partnerships

Schools must implement and sustain a fully integrated system of supports for students by providing

services and forming partnerships with our community to meet the needs of our children. In this way,

we can create a comprehensive, multifaceted and cohesive system that supports student learning and

healthy development.

Technology Resources

Technology resources include hardware (equipment) and software (programs), as well as approaches a

processes such as distance learning, e-learning/online learning, blogs, podcasts, webinars, video streaming, and much more.

Visual Resources

Visual Resources include photos, pictures, video clips, maps, drawings, and illustrations.

21st Century Curriculum

Twenty-first century curriculum is interdisciplinary, multilingual, multicultural, project-based,and re-

search-driven. It is connected to the community – local, state, national and global. Sometimes students

are collaborating with people around the world in various projects. The curriculum incorporates higher

order thinking skills, multiple intelligences, technology and multimedia, the multiple literacies of the

21st century, and authentic assessments. Service learning is an important component.

• Interdisciplinary Learning The classroom is expanded to include the greater community. Stu

dents are self-directed, and work both independently and interdependently. The curriculum an

instruction are designed to challenge all students, and provide for differentiation. The curricu-

lum is not textbook-driven or fragmented, but is thematic, project-based and integrated. Skill




and content are not taught as an end in themselves, but students learn them through their research and

application in their projects. Textbooks, if they have them, are just one of many resources.

• Knowledge Application Knowledge is not memorization of facts and figures, but is constructed

through research and application, and connected to previous knowledge and personal experience. The

skills and content become relevant and needed as students require this information to complete their

projects. The content and basic skills are applied within the context of the curriculum, and are notends in themselves. Assessment moves from regurgitation of memorized facts and disconnected

processes to demonstration of understanding through application in a variety of contexts. Real-world

audiences are an important part of the assessment process, as is self-assessment.

• Multimedia Literacy Media literacy skills are honed as students address real-world issues, from the

environment to poverty. Students use the technological and multimedia tools now available to them to

design and produce web sites, television shows, radio shows, public service announcements, mini-

documentaries, how-to DVDs, oral histories, and even films. Students find their voices as they create

projects using multimedia and deliver these products to real-world audiences. Students realize that

they can make a difference and change the world. They learn what it is to be a contributing citizen,

and carry these citizenship skills forward throughout their lives.

• 21st Century Schools 21st century schools focus staff and students on ensuring that every student

graduates from high school prepared for the option of enrolling in a four-year college or university,

pursuing a successful career, and living a healthy life. Students in 21st century schools develop and

acquire the confidence, competence and information needed to make positive choices for their future.

They demonstrate strength and competence in all areas needed for full participation in the 21st cen-

tury economic, political, cultural, and intellectual life of our nation and global society. In addition to

academic competency, these areas include multilingual and cross-cultural competency; technologicalliteracy; communication skills; aesthetic sensibility; critical and creative thinking, reasoning, and so-

lution-seeing, social, environmental, and civic responsibility, and strength of character.




VII. SERR Community ConversationsParticipant Demographics

The SERR process intentionally involved participants from a variety of

perspectives reflective of the city as a whole, with an emphasis on SFUSD

parents. The following demographic breakdowns are based on the survey

responses of the community members who participated in the community

conversations. Though over 900 people participated in conversations, only

814 attendees completed the SERR survey.




VII. SERR Community ConversationsParticipant Demographics

SERR Participant Demographics and Survey Responses 2007

The SERR process intentionally involved participants from a variety of perspectives reflective of the city as a whole, with an emphasis on SFUSD parents. The following demographic break-

downs are based on the survey responses of the community members who participated in thecommunity conversations. Though over 900 people participated in conversations, only 814 atten-dees completed the SERR survey.

“Are you a: Parent, Educator, Community Member, High School Student

or Middle School Student?”

Parent 64%High School Student 22%Parent and Educator 4%Educator 4%

Middle School Student 4%Community Member (non-parent) 2%

“If you are a parent, does your child or do your children attend: SFUSD Public School, Char-ter School, Private/Independent/Parochial School, Pre-School Age or Younger, Other?”

SFUSD Public School 80%Pre-School Age or Younger 14%Private/Independent/Parochial School 8%Charter School 5%Other 4%

“What is your race/ethnicity?” SERR SFUSD City

African American 10% 13% 8%American Indian / Alaska Native 0.3% 0.6% 0.3%Asian / Chinese 24% 40% 31%Hispanic / Latino 24% 22% 14%Pacific Islander 4% 1.2% 0.4%White (not Hispanic) 26% 9% 44%Multiple 3% n/a 3%Other 9% 11% n/a

“What is your primary language?” SERR SFUSD City

Cantonese / Mandarin 12% 14% 22%English 60% 71% 58%Russian 1% .02% n/aSpanish 18% 12% 10%Other 11% 3% 10%

sfusd 2008-2012 strategic plan

Documents