Monday, October 24, 2016

State Board of Education Approves New School Accountability System to Replace the Old API System

State Board of Education Approves New School Accountability System to Replace the Old API System

September 8, 2016  

SACRAMENTO—As required by state law, the State Board of Education on September 8, 2016  approved key elements of a new accountability system that evaluates schools and districts in 10 areas critical to student performance, including graduation rates, readiness for college and careers, test scores, and progress of English learners.

The system reinforces California’s national leadership in developing an accountability system designed to help all schools continuously improve.

“Today the State Board has taken a big step toward improving our accountability system, as required under the new school funding formula approved by the Governor and the Legislature. This accountability design is unique and has never been used before in the United States,” said California State Board of Education President Michael Kirst. “Parents, educators, and the public will soon be able to look at a variety of areas to tell how their school is doing, where it may be strong, where it may be weak, and where it may need help.”

State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson called this a “new system for a new era.” The changes, which put California on the cutting edge of innovations that enhance student learning, are happening in a state with the most diverse student population and with the most students—more than 6.2 million—at more than 10,000 schools.

“Once again, California leads the way. No longer will our parents and our communities be asked to evaluate a school or a district based on a single number,” said Torlakson. “The new accountability system provides parents, educators, and community members with a wealth of information, allowing them to dig deep into a variety of areas that affect student performance and more effectively hold their districts accountable. It will also help educators more easily identify and assist schools and districts in need of help.”

The system gives parents, educators, and the community more tools to understand what is happening at their schools, promotes equity by helping to identify disparities among student groups, and more effectively identifies the schools that need extra help and where they need it.

“Today’s action will help all students succeed in 21st century careers,” said Torlakson.

The innovative new system replaces the outdated Academic Performance Index (API), which relied almost exclusively on test scores to measure progress, and is a key element of the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), which provides more local control over revenues and more resources for students with the greatest needs.

The board approved actions that make up an “evaluation rubric,” which provides a tool for holding schools and districts accountable for the eight state priorities identified in the Local Control Funding Formula, approved by the Legislature in 2013. Among the priorities are student achievement, student engagement, school climate, and parent engagement.

The September 8, 2016 Board actions included:

*       Adopting four state indicators of school success with performance standards: readiness for college and careers, graduation rates, progress of English learners, and suspension rates.

*       Adopting two state indicators of school success, with performance standards to be finalized in the coming months: scores on state standardized tests and chronic absenteeism.

*       Adopting four local indicators with performance standards: basic conditions at a school, progress in implementing standards, parent engagement, and school climate.

*       Establishing a system by which schools that do not meet performance standards can become eligible for technical assistance and intervention.

*       Providing information on model practices of schools performing well and providing resources for schools.

The performance standards will be based on status, how each school or district fared last year, and change, how much they have improved or declined in the past three years. Schools will be rated based on a combination of these measures and assigned one of five performance levels. From highest to lowest, the categories are: Blue, Green, Yellow, Orange, and Red.

The status and change thresholds were developed by analyzing current data so they would broadly reflect where districts and schools are now. Using high school graduation rates as an example, five status levels were set, with a low of a graduation rate of less than 67 percent (considered very poor) to a high of a 95 percent graduation rate (considered very high). In addition, five rates of change were set, from a low of a decline of 5 percent or more to a high of an increase of 5 percent or more.

The new system provides multiple ongoing measures of school performance instead of the single, one-item snapshot from the prior system.

The specific display of the performance system is not final. Staff will work with parents, teachers, and members of the public to ensure it is easy to understand, similar to a report card. The Web-based system will be available in early 2017.

During today’s meeting, both Kirst and Torlakson thanked employees of the California Department of Education and educators throughout the state for their hard work in developing this ground-breaking system and for their future work in implementing it.

For more information, please check California State Board Agenda Item 1.

Below is a copy of the motion approved unanimously on Thursday, September 8, 2016, by the State Board of Education:

1.    Adopt the LCFF evaluation rubrics with the following components:

o    The concise set of state indicators and local performance indicators approved at the May and July 2016 State Board of Education meetings.

o    Performance standards for the state indicators and local performance indicators based on the methodologies approved at the May 2016 State Board of Education meeting and July 2016 State Board of Education meeting, respectively.

o    Criteria for determining local educational agency eligibility for technical assistance and intervention under the LCFF statutes based on the performance standards for the state indicators and local performance indicators.

o    Statements of Model Practices, with the content to be finalized at a future date.

o    Links to external resources, with the content to be finalized at a future date.

2.    Approve:

o    The proposed performance standards, based on the approved methodology to establish cut-scores and performance categories, for the following state indicators:

§  Progress of English learners toward English proficiency based on the English learner indicator (Priority 4)

§  High school graduation rate (Priority 5)

§  College/Career Indicator, which combines Grade 11 test scores on English Language Arts and Math and other measures of college and career readiness (Priorities 7 and 8)

§  Suspension rates by LEA type (elementary, high, and unified), and by school type (elementary, middle, and high) (Priority 6)

o    The proposed standards for the local performance indicators:

§  Appropriately Assigned Teachers, Access to Curriculum-Aligned Instructional Materials, and Safe, Clean, and Functional School Facilities (Priority 1)

§  Implementation of State Academic Standards (Priority 2)

§  Parent Engagement (Priority 3)

§  Local Climate Surveys (Priority 6)

§  Coordination of Services for Expelled Students (Priority 9—County Office of Education only)

§  Coordination of Services for Foster Youth (Priority 10—County Office of Education only)

o    The proposed criteria to determine local educational agency eligibility for technical assistance and intervention under the LCFF statutes.

3.    Direct CDE staff to develop a recommendation for the November 2016 SBE meeting on proposed performance standards, based on the approved methodology to establish cut-scores and performance categories, for the state indicator for student test scores on English Language Arts and Math for grades 3–8, that includes results from the second year of Smarter Balanced tests.

4.    Direct CDE staff to complete further development work on the College/Career Indicator, including student course-taking information, and options to measure access to a broad course of study (Priority 7) as a state indicator, for the next phase of the evaluation rubrics.

5.    Direct CDE staff to further develop the content for the statements of model practices and links to external resources so those components can be incorporated into the Web-based user interface in the future.

6.    Approve the proposed annual process for the SBE to review the evaluation rubrics to determine whether newly available data and/or research support the inclusion of a new state or local performance indicator or substituting such an indicator for an existing indicator.

# # # #

Tom Torlakson — State Superintendent of Public Instruction
Communications Division, Room 5206, 916-319-0818, Fax 916-319-0100

Last Reviewed: Thursday, September 8, 2016


Release: #16-59
September 8, 2016

Contact: Bill Ainsworth
Phone: 916-319-0818


Wednesday, September 28, 2016

A Whopping 44% of Buyers are paying ALL-CASH to buy Palo Alto Homes the past 2 1/2 years

To understand the impact of ALL-CASH buyers, in Palo Alto, for the past 2 1/2 years, the percentage of homes that were bought by buyers who paid ALL-CASH is 44% !! This is in Palo Alto, where homes are regularly in the multi-million dollar range.  However, don't despair mortgage buyers.  I've been able to get my buyers deals even though we need to get a mortgage.

Friday, September 9, 2016

KHovanian Homes For Sale at Traverse in San Jose

KHovanian Homes for Sale at Traverse (2150 Trade Zone Blvd, San Jose, CA)
Journey Model Homes priced $894,990-$1,069,990
Voyage Model Homes priced $915,922-$1,156,363
Voyage Non-Model Homes priced $839,800-$1,002,300

Monday, September 5, 2016

Affordable Housing in San Jose near downtown.

Two affordable housing units available.  These units are subject to the restrictions of the City of San Jose BEGIN Homebuyer Program.  This program offers down payment assistance to people who qualify for help based on their income.

1375 Lick Ave, #220 and #530 are both 1bed 1bath 733sqft and offered at $360,000

For Facebook article, click here --> Facebook

Thursday, September 1, 2016

Difference in price between an all-cash 10-day close double-end sale vs. a conventional sale

Nowadays, the general public SEES sales data through sites like Redfin, Zillow, and Trulia.  However, the general public often does not know how to INTERPRET the data.

One example is the discrepancy in sales price of IDENTICAL units in the SAME complex.

In the past month, identical 2-bedroom 1-bathroom 858 square foot units sold in the SAME Middlefield Meadows complex for very DIFFERENT final sales prices.

96 Flynn Ave #A sold for $725,000
122 Flynn Ave #A sold for $650,000

Why such a HUGE difference?  I took a closer look.

After looking into it, I found out that 122 Flynn Ave #A had two reasons for such a low sales price:

--ALL-CASH deal closing in just TEN DAYS.  There's no comparison between an all-cash, 10-day close deal like that to buyers who have only  20% down payment.  The other Flynn (which has a CONVENTIONAL buyer with over 20% down payment) paid $725,000.

--That listing agent's company DOUBLE-ENDED that transaction, meaning the same real estate company had BOTH the seller AND the buyer.  Perhaps in an effort to earn double-commission, that real estate company settled for a lower price after only 3 days on the market.

In summary:
122 Flynn Avenue #A
sold for $650,000 <-- all-cash="" closing="" days="" in="" span="" ten="" this="" was="">
96 Flynn Avenue #A
sold for $725,000 <-- 20="" conventional="" down="" loan="" over="" span="" this="" was="" with="">

Difference in price between an all-cash 10-day close double-end sale vs. a conventional sale

Saturday, August 6, 2016