Bay Area

Notes for Accreditation Meeting February 18, 2004


Item 1: Our group discussed the purpose of accreditation, and how completing this process would help us better serve our students and their families.

Item 2: Our group discussed the initial recommendations made by the state when they reviewed our application. We talked about the accreditation procedure, the improvements which the state had suggested, and the schedule of visits planned by state officials.

Item 3: Catherine Miller informed the group that we would be focusing our attention on Section E of the Focus on Learning Schoolwide Criteria, which covers Leadership and Staff. Our assignment as a group is to create a list of strengths (what we are already doing well) and prioritized growth areas (possible suggestions for what we still need to do or could do better) for the four items listed in this section.

The group determined that a good approach to meeting these goals would be to brainstorm on each item, focusing on how we would gather data about what is currently being done in each area. After gathering data we could then suggest ways to implement any further action that seemed necessary.

Item 4: We looked at the first area under Section E of the Focus on Learning Schoolwide Criteria, which addressed how administration and staff would make decisions to further effective learning by our students based on student achievement data.

It was suggested that an interview with Sherri to find out what decisions were being made by administration was a good first step. It was also suggested that input from staff (teachers) might best be accomplished by an e-mail survey.

Some concerns were voiced regarding the STAR testing and other assessment tools we are currently required by the state. These concerns addressed the issue of parent reaction to testing, which directly impacts the percentage of our families who test. We have some parents who are philosophically opposed to testing, others who try to avoid it because they feel their children won't do well, and others who try to avoid it because it is inconvenient. Some parents are also concerned because they don't want information about their children made accessible to government agencies.

Catherine addressed the concerns and encouraged the ESs to once again press these parents to see the importance of testing as it relates to our life as a charter school. She also reminded the ES with the parent who was afraid of the impact on the student’s records, that the parent could opt on the student agreement to not have the results in the cume and that the results are not reported to the State individually.

Item 5: We looked at the second area under Section E, which addressed staff preparation and professional development. We listed ways the school has provided training, such as the initial ES training, the ongoing meetings and agenda items, the agenda quizzes and tiger searches, and the online training through CTAP

It was proposed that with the survey that goes to the ES's, that we ask them what skills they felt were most important and most needed to do their job effectively. The survey would also ask which skills and training already provided by the school are the ES's using most frequently and effectively with their families and students.

Item 6: We looked at the third area under Section E, which addressed how training for staff and leadership served to prepare us to meet identified student learning needs.

Again, the agendas were cited as providing useful information. Catherine is compiling a spreadsheet of the agendas and the areas that they provide staff development. It was also pointed out that the parent survey results would probably pinpoint some of the needs we might not be aware of. A parent survey specifically addressing the issue of learning needs might be a good idea.

Item 7: We looked at the last area under Section E, which addressed strategies employed by leadership to encourage parental and community involvement.

Ways we felt we could gather information in this area included an interview with Marsha Silva, looking at the Parent Surveys for ES Evaluation, and visiting a parent council meeting for direct feedback from parents.

It was also brought up at this time that most Bay Area parents do not take advantage of the opportunities at our existing Learning Centers because of the distance involved, which is a problem not faced by site based schools. We tried to suggest ways the services and opportunities might be made more accessible to Bay Area families. One suggestion which would not involve opening a Bay Area site was the creation of a Learning Centermobile, which could visit the Bay Area and park at libraries, making it possible for Bay Area families to check out or return items, return computers or turn them in for repair, use equipment like laminators, and so forth.