tv [untitled] June 14, 2011 8:30pm-9:00pm PDT
8:30 pm
recovered under no child left behind, etc., because remember that hp happening. we weren't really clear that we were going to say that it had to be a p.e. credentialed teacher. so we need toe be clear about that but at least we need to take that into consideration. even though we passed the amendment. i actually as far as i know and we should do some investigation, i think before we make such requirements because this is the way we get into unintended consequences. i just don't think there are people out there that have p.e. credentials and jrotc credentials and are looking for these jobs because this jrotc credentialing program, training program for people retiring from the military have specific
8:31 pm
and rigorous requirements and then to have them go into a two-year credentialing program sun realistic. we're just going to shut the door on any market that there might be for us to fulfill these jobs. i think we should at least look into that before we do such a thing. then last, i wanted to say this, let's remember that the requirements even under the new more stringent state law and requirements that, again, i just want to reiterate were only being implemented at the time we were talking about this give more than one way for students to fulfill their high school graduation p.e. requirements. the second way is to pass the fitness gram. in fact, they have to pass the fitness gram otherwise they have to take p.e. for four years. if we look -- we had made available to us a document
8:32 pm
showing us the passage of the fitness gram for ninth and 10th graders in the p.e. independent study, rotc cadets for students that have jrotc and not p.e. and the passing rate for jrotc cadets is significantly higher in every case. and in three schools we had gallon le yo and burton, every ninth grade jrotc event pass the fitness gram in ninth grade. so one, i want to commend people for this. with all due respect and i have the greatest respect for the p.e. teachers and i have heard people talk a lot about how kids who have trouble with p.e., you know, that the people can't make them go no matter what they do, that they are -- have been doing much better when offered the option of doing their p.e. independently through the jrotc option and i
8:33 pm
was extremely moved this evening to hear students and i thank you all for coming when you're not in school, i really appreciate that. to say that this gave them more flexibility academically. i think we should at least recognize that there should be anna bit of unintended positive here, occasionally that happens to us. so i -- you know, i urge my colleagues to pass this. i have my nervousness about the amendment we passed because it's the same kind of we don't really know if it's possible we're kind of making it up as we go along. i urge that we not only make the amendment suggesta -- a suggested concept so that we don't have to go through this please, please all the time perpetually but also that we think about a way that we could actually do some investigation
8:34 pm
about availability before i retire ourselves into something that just basically is sending out the message. weapon don't want any new instructors. >> commissioner norton? commissioner norton: so i want to ask our deputy general council angie miller who i have to say much to her chagrin has become an expert on this topic and it's partly why i'm saying we don't want to bring this up again because she's tired of it. but just for one last hue ra if you could read the language that i would like to propose an amendment that i outlined earlier. >> if the commission on future credentialing or other appropriate state agency or law provides future guidance to allow one jrotc teacher to teach a course that offers p.e. credit without a p.e. credential or two, otherwise allow jrotc, they will allow to
8:35 pm
meet the p.e. requirement if feasible. >> i second. >> discussion on this? is there any question from the -- >> so i have a question. what regards on the waiver of the -- so we have a clear understanding that jrotc teachers are credentialed but are not credentialed the same way the way teachers are -- so many of our credential instructors don't have their b.a. which when all of our drentialed teachers do. so in the language that you just proposed is that -- how does that tie to what currently exists in terms of the recognition of instructors by the state?
8:36 pm
not by our district because we don't honor that but other places who do honor their credential -- i just want to make sure that it doesn't get misinterpret -- can i finish my question. i just want to make sure there isn't overlap or cover fusion about that or six years from now when we're all gone that people interpreted in a way that says what currently exists is ok if, you know, by then this happens resolved itself at the state level. >> i hope i'm interpreting your question correctly but if thwarted to say that jrotc, if the commission on teacher credentialing says if they teach a course that offers a p.e. credit because right now c.t.c. has provided a guidance that says if you're going to provide a jrotc class that
8:37 pm
provides that, you need a credential. this is saying if that changes to no longer allow a p.e. credential then we would go with that guidance if feasible b. if they say you can do it with a brand-new credential that nobody has then it's not feasibleness necessarily. >> and then how would that change the amendment of how it came through in terms of requiring -- so we would then be able to hire anybody who has just the jrotc credential should that be the change at the state level? oh, ok. thank you. >> so -- >> so we're still on discussion on the amendment. so commissioner -- >> i just wanted to know if there would be any objection of having a teacher supervised just because if we want to do -- you know, just to allow for the independent study option if we want to continue it? would that be ok? i mean, do we consider the current independent study to be
8:38 pm
-- i mean, you know, teach an independent study kind of are a little dissident to me. >> well, i my intent in proposing this amendment is that we would not have independent study were if the guidance from the state would change. >> i understand. since we don't know what the state might do since we had everybody else that has been unable to get them clear, it would be, you know, if they say, you know, you can -- if they just make it permissive so we can have the independent study option or have a variety of options, then that would take care of that and there wouldn't be any reason -- i mean, it wouldn't do anything bad to us to add that language, would it? >> your question is well taken and we can discuss that. my intent if we can get the
8:39 pm
state to change the screwy guidance, can we go back to how things were in 2007, 2008? >> i understand that. i'm just saying if we're trying to avoid having to revisit this based on trying to anticipate what state agencies might do, let's try to make it as permissive as possible as opposed to as narrow as possible. >> my only concern about just adding supervise is i don't want to create confusion about for example -- does that mean we're going to say in the future there's a teacher of record and also a jrotc instructor. i'm just worried about that may be creating confusion. if it's important we could just add another sentence that says -- >> we can add a sentence that just says if -- it's our choice to contend and the state allows the continuation of the p.e. independent study option and
8:40 pm
also allows for that to be supervised for jrotc instructor then we would do that. excuse me. anyway, either way would be fine. in fact, they're all fine with me. i'm just trying to -- it always happens that we can't -- that we don't anticipate somebody else comes up with some other problem even if they don't intend to as in this case. >> commissioner maufas, did you have a commission? commission inner -- commissioner maufas: i want to make sure i enter yect something into that discussion. i want to be very, very clear. at this point in time if we're going to write something in that may alter the future for us, i want it to be narrow. i don't want it to be permissive or any way vague because i don't know what will come down the pike when i'm no longer here. and again, my respect for a teacher getting -- working in
8:41 pm
fsusd what we consider credentialing for physical education. i want to respect that i want to create something that's not vague or confusing to future board members. i believe they'll be educated and academically sound that they can read but there's a continuous sort of mantra about what they thought back then or what they were considering or what was the temperament of the board back then. who knows if any of us will be here to offer that to them. we have it in writing. that's what we'll be able to offer to them. so i would like to be as clear and concise as possible and not throw anything in there that gives a change at the state level, you know, us freedom to do anything that we could
8:42 pm
potentially be creative enough to make up that will work for a select few. that's what i don't want to do. i think if something changes, we should address it when it changes because we'll know what it is, not guess what it will be. i want to be very about -- i want to be very clear about that. so in creating policy i think it's incumbent about the board to address the policy as it comes. this is just a discussion currently. i may have comments later. >> thank you, commissioner fewer? commissioner fewer: i just want to comment on the fitness gram and i questioned about it and actually -- so district p. tells me that there's no way you could know the result of the fitness gram because actually they haven't been calculated yet. so i don't understand how we're able to get that and compare
8:43 pm
the jrotc and the nonjrotc students and i heard directly from the administrator that those numbers haven't been out and haven't been calculated. has the p.e. department don't have those results? i'm surprised to see them. i question them. and this is what i was told and so -- i don't know how those numbers came about. they're startling numbers quite frankly. i -- i don't think -- are they last year. so for last year. so we're looking at this year also for our independent study? no, isn't it this year. yeah, it's for this year. commissioner wynns thank you for reminding me that i was correct on it. i just want to say i don't know how they got those numbers. so i want to caution commissioners to take it with sort of a grain of salt. when i questioned it, actually, those results haven't been
8:44 pm
calculated yet. so thank you. >> commissioneree? -- commissioner yee? commissioner yee: i just want to make sure what we're discussing. can you read the amendment? i mean, we didn't add any more language? can you read commissioner norton's amendment? >> ok. if the commission on teacher credentialing or other appropriate state agency or law provides future guidance to allow one jrotc instructor to teach a course that offers p.e. credit without a p.e. credential or two otherwise allow jrotc to satisfy the requirement, they shall don't the guidance and allow it if feasible. >> so if we just leave that alone, we'll be fine.
8:45 pm
because an independent study in both -- whether it's my amendment or whether it will be written in there, it says "the necessary certifications." so if it changes then the necessary certificate changes. so i think we're ok with that. yeah. >> ok. so we have a second on the amendment which is the amendment to commissioner yee's amendment. >> no, it's another amendment. >> right. calm down. it's an amendment -- i'm not saying it's amending commissioner yee's amendment. what i'm saying we're working on an amened resolution and we're aiding to his resolution. >> to -- >> to the original resolution. not the one that we've been --
8:46 pm
we had before. so not on the amendmented one we're going back -- >> we amended it. >> right. that's what i said the first time. so stop looking at me and stop giving me feedback because i'm looking at legal. so we're working off an amended -- so the original resolution was amended once by commissioner ye. and now we've got a second amendment that's been put forward and that's going to be added to the amended resolution. so the language that he's already made changes too, this will be in addition to his changes. thank you. so any further discussion on that? so roll call on that, please. >> ms. fewer? >> no. >> ms. maufas? >> no. >> dr. mirafi? >> aye. >> ms. norton? >> yes. >> ms. wynns?
8:47 pm
>> yes. >> mr. yee? >> yes. >> ms. mendoza? >> yes. >> we are now with the new amended, amended resolution. ok. so now we are open for broad discussion on the amended amended. commissioner maufas did you want to start your -- all right. stay with us. we're almost there. so thank you, president mendoza. my comments are really for the superintendent. superintendent, i think a few years ago when this discussion was really at its height in san francisco politics, you had made a promise to us that you would stay out of this conversation. so i don't know why i'm looking at a superintendent's proposal.
8:48 pm
i mean, i think -- no, you've told me. but i -- i -- i think any of the board members would have brought this forward. and if it didn't come forward then the action that the board had taken would have taken effect. so again, i think board members here are savvy enough to write an amendment to an extended resolution. we've done it before. we'll do it many more times in the future. but if you promise to stay out of this political conversation, i would appreciate you honoring that. >> just a point of clarification, i was asked by a majority of the board to put this on. >> i'm asking just to honor -- guys, listen. i'm particularly pointing out that you had made a promise to us. >> to this date, i don't believe anybody really knows what i think on this particular issue.
8:49 pm
and i've been true to that promise. >> thank you. >> commissioner fewer? commissioner fewer: oh, so i would like to request a couple of things. one i would again like to request a report that i requested last year in june which i respectfully then requested again this year and apparently people are unwilling to bring forth the report so that's what i said in getting a report here. and then secondly, i would like a full budget report because i am chair of the budget committee. so likede a full budget report including also the supervising teacher's time and also the training time. so let's get a full analysis of what really the whole program costs. and i think that would be very helpful. and then i would like to see
8:50 pm
another report on -- there's a third report and i hope this isn't impacting staff too much but i don't think this would be too difficult is how this impacts programs in our schools. so i know we had to consolidate six p.e. teachers. i think we found places for four of them. we had to give pink slips to i think three. so i just wanted to know how this impacts really our credentialed teachers. thanks very much. >> all right other comments? commissioner? >> yeah, i have heard from jrotc instructors as well as p.e. instructors about the need for the district to really facilitate improvements to the way independent studies working. so i received a very strong report of steps that were taken by the district to facilitate that but i hear from p.e.
8:51 pm
instructors that this didn't work very well. i hear from the jrotc instructors that they were asked to leave meetings. so i really want the district to step up and facilitate a session where people are in the room and they're talking about how best to serve students in the independent study program. i think there's room for improvement and i think it's our responsibility to facilitate those improvements. comments? >> thank you, president mendoza. i just want to make sure that the board is aware of over the last two years, we have facilitated meetings where i personally facilitied a meeting between the p.e. teachers, and the jrotc instructors where we spoke specifically about implementation. there are always going to be issues of implementation especially with policys that
8:52 pm
are open to interpretation. we pledge to continue to have that kind of a working relationship to do what's best for students. >> commissioner fewer? commissioner fewer: thank you deputy superintendent. i concur with commissioner maraza that there are still issues and problems. and if weapon want this to be a -- we want this to be a successful program and we want to advise that the district must step up and take some leadership in this and the first step is applying us with a report on some of the things, the problems and analysis of some of the issues and how we can address those. and so -- and then i would suspect that the curriculum committee whoever would be the chair, you know, in the previous next years or two would call this to make sure to the committee to make sure that the recommendations are being
8:53 pm
implemented. >> thank you. other comments? >> so i actually, i have a few comments of my own. this is probably one of the most device i issues that comes across the board -- divisive issues that has come across the board of education demr the last 20 years and now. and it has created some real tensions among board members and among people in the community that i think is unnecessary and unfortunate. on a personal level, i am extremely disappointed in the conversations and the commitments that were made by our instructors to many of us. there was a tremendous amount -- and i'm going to put it out there of political capital that was put on the lines for a program that i think many of us
8:54 pm
actually support. and i really do feel slided to a large degree. my former boss and the mayor have had any discussions and many arguments about it and many humbling conversations about this. and at the end of the day, for me, it's always been and for many of my colleagues about the kids. i think what turns my vote around last time were the kids. i'll continue to support the students in san francisco unified school district because that's my job. but i am extremely disappointed in the adults that have negotiated on their baff for a program that quite frankly i feel they were hoping they were going to change at the state level and they didn't. i think that you have jeopardized this program. i think that you've created
8:55 pm
additional tensions that were really unnecessary and i think it's unforgenafment it's taken me a lot of thought about whether or not i'm going to support this resolution tonight. but now i want to talk to you students about holding your teachers accountable about pushing them to stick their decision just as they ask you to stick to yours. to get behind them and say have you signed up for the classs that you said you would sign up for? because we want you to be better instructors as well. weapon want you to be high qualify instructors just as we ask any teacher that we have in the san francisco unified. so i'm asking you as students to hold your teachers accountable just as you have
8:56 pm
asked me to be accountable to you as our students. and i'm particularly supportive of the program because it really speaks to my own community, the filipino community. so i kneel we really need to think about all of the things my colleagues have talked about in terms of making sure that we're accountable and proving the program, not making independent study independent on its own but really holding it accountable for what it's intended to do it does provide flexibility to students. and i think, you know, as we're starting to tighten up on our programs and our master calendars that the flexibility is really going to matter for students to be well-rounded and to be able to have the ability to take an approach to education that makes a lot more sense for them. i think it's going to be really important to have an update every six months on where our
8:57 pm
teachers and our instructors are on registration because i am not going to be asked a month before the two years are up to support this program again. you've made ea commitment. we will provide you more time potentially, but you have to make an effort because all of us are sweating up here and making an effort for you. roll call, please. >> thank you. ms. fewer? commissioner fewer: no. >> ms. maufas? >> no. >> ms. norton? >> yes. >> ms. wynns? >> aye. >> mr. yee? >> aye. >> ms. mendoza? are >> yes. >> thank you everyone for joining us this evening. we do not want to see this
8:58 pm
back. so if you could -- we still have a board meeting going on and we still have quite a bit of the agenda to follow so if you could please exit quietly so that we can continue. ms. medina, so public comment should have happened some time back. i'd like to go back to public comment or should we -- what do we need to do in order to because we're past the time for public comments to have happened. >> under your board rules you do have the ability to move items out of order.
8:59 pm
>> ok. ok. so we actually -- general manager are up now. item nine is the board members proposal and there's none tonight. i have quite a few speakers i'm going to invite to the podium. so eileen chen. monique -- i'm sorry. i already have her. sandra sandoval. jose esetera. robert clothier, shadeck, maria flow rezz, -- flores, alejandra
102 Views
IN COLLECTIONS
SFGTV2: San Francisco Government Television Television Archive Television Archive News Search ServiceUploaded by TV Archive on