By Jason KUROSU

On April 5, Measure S, the much discussed obligation bond, passed with a whopping 69.5% of the vote. In this period of economic uncertainty, Measure S has seemed like the only beacon of hope for public education funding in the state. For this reason, support for the measure was always high leading up to the municipal elections on April 5, but there was still some contention over the purpose of the measure.

Measure S is a continuation of Measure K, a successful measure which upgraded many building projects throughout the district. Measure S focuses on similar projects, with an emphasis on technology.

“I think the first and most widely felt impact will be upgrading our technology infrastructure,” said Mary Boger, GUSD school member and member of the Yes 4 S campaign. “That will benefit every school.”

The current economic crisis did bring into question whether the focus of the measure was in the right place. With teacher layoffs and increasing class sizes, should this, a source of funding in a time of budget cuts, be dedicated to technology?

Either way, Measure S passed and the immense cuts that have been expected for months don’t seem to be going away. What happens now with Measure S?

“Next steps will [be] setting up the oversight committee and prioritizing our projects,” said Boger.

“The GUSD Board of Trustees will be forming the oversight committee,” said Harry Hull, a real estate broker who was involved with the Yes 4 S campaign. “The law spells out who must be on this type of committee, so the board will be working on filling those spots.”

As for specific projects, Hull said, “The GUSD Board is also working on the project list.  Nothing has been finalized at this point, but it will be coming into focus in the next few weeks.”

By then, the economic landscape could be different and Measure S’s role might heed less scrutiny. Parents, educators and residents will be watching for the project list either way.

On April 5 voters who live within the Glendale Unified School District area will be asked to choose two candidates out of the eight vying for a seat on the district’s school board. The school board members are elected by voters to establish the educational policies of the district. In addition to guiding policy decisions they are also charged with hiring the superintendent of the district. School board members are elected to a four-year term and receive minimum compensation.

In an effort to inform the public of the candidates running for the board of education the Crescenta Valley Weekly has sent to the candidates questions pertaining to the district’s governing board. Below are their answers. This week we present responses by Todd Hunt, Nayiri Nahabedian and Dan Cabrera.

1) What do you feel you can bring to the Glendale board of education?

Todd Hunt: I will bring badly needed experience, leadership, and vision to the Glendale school board.

In the midst of our statewide economic crisis, I believe my 25 years of real-world business experience will provide new ideas and new perspectives to the board.

It’s the board’s job to responsibly and prudently manage the tax dollars the district receives; therefore, we need board members who have actual experience operating within budgets and who understand the financial implications of their decisions.

I’m the senior vice president of a software technology firm. I manage a division with $4 million in revenues and a $1.5 million budget. I believe my experience in finance and operations will be crucial, especially now.

I am a leader in our community. I serve on the board of directors for the Glendale Educational Foundation, the Glendale YMCA, CV Prom Plus, and the Kiwanis Club of Glendale. I also volunteer my time with AYSO soccer, the CV Drug and Alcohol Prevention Coalition and the Character and Ethics Project.

For the school district to be an effective part of the community I feel it is important for board members to be invested in the communities we serve.  Over the years I have developed good relationships with Glendale City Council members, CV Town Council members, the Glendale Police, and the L.A.  County Sheriffs.

Lastly, I will bring new vision for the future of the school district. Coming from a technology background, I am committed to the strategic planning and implementation of a district-wide technology infrastructure. We need a fully wired and wireless district-wide network that is capable of utilizing not only today’s technology but also the technologies of the future. Our teachers need to utilize the latest technologies so that they can prepare our children and grandchildren to compete in the global economy.

Nayiri Nahabedian: As your representative on the Board of Education, I have been a forceful advocate for making schools safer, keeping class size small, ensuring excellence in teaching, and protecting each child’s opportunity to learn and succeed.

It has not been easy –  particularly because of California’s worst budget crisis in history.

In these tough times, I have worked with the community, parents, and teachers to seek constructive solutions. Together we have succeeded in avoiding teacher layoffs, reducing bullying, targeting drug abuse, keeping class sizes low, while focusing on a first-class education for our students.

We have much to be grateful for in Glendale schools – awards and honors, business and community support, and terrific PTAs. Still, these are challenging times.

Now more than ever, we need a strong and experienced advocate for children on the Board of Education who will keep a balance between competing interests. I will continue to advocate for safe schools, rigorous and relevant curriculum, and a 21st Century education to the children of La Crescenta and Glendale. Together we can do even better!

My background: I moved to Glendale from the Boston area while a teenager, and graduated from Glendale High School. I have my BA in psychology from UCLA, and a master’s from UCLA’s School of Public Policy and Social Research.

I have been a committed community activist, children’s advocate, and education reformer for over 20 years. I have dedicated my personal and professional life to improving the lives of the children including: co-founding Generation Next Mentorship Program, working for the Children and Family Services and serving on Rotary’s Bully Me Not Coalition.

For more than 10 years, I have been a faculty member at CSULA’s School of Social Work where I teach courses on child wellness, public policy, and child advocacy. It has been an honor to serve on the GUSD Board of Education for the past four years.

Dan Cabrera: I was an English teacher at Glendale High for the past eight years, a PTA member for over 20 years and a past PTA president at Glendale High. These experiences give me insight into the challenges facing parents, credentialed teachers and classified staff, as well as insight into the time, effort and mentoring necessary to train an effective teacher.

I was the owner of a retail chain of stores headquartered in Glendale: Friedmans Microwave Ovens. This business experience gave me an understanding of budgets, long-range planning, hiring and training, construction schedules, negotiation and the importance of listening.

I have an MBA from Stanford University, where I focused on business policy and finance.

I have been active in many community groups, including the following service:

•President of the Royal Canyon Property Owners Association for nine years

•Little League coach for five years

•25 year member, The Glendale Historical Society; served a term as VP Preservation

•Member of Glendale School District’s 2015 Strategic Planning Committee

These experiences have taught me the value of listening carefully to all parties concerned before making a final decision on matters that affect many people.

2) What is the number one challenge facing the Glendale school district and what is your plan to address this challenge?

Todd Hunt: The district’s finances continue to be the biggest challenge. Most of us have to do more with less these days. The school district is facing the same realities. As a parent, I want to see our high standards of student achievement and academic performance maintained. But how can this be done with reduced state funding? As a businessman, I believe we need to take a hard look at both sides of the ledger – expenses and revenues.

As your board member, I will call for a thorough review of every dollar being spent. I believe every line item and program needs to be evaluated and scrutinized. I will ask the tough questions and make sure that the district is being responsible with our tax dollars.

On the revenue side, it’s important to understand that our district has to compete for students and the dollars they represent. Parents are looking for the best educational opportunities for their children. The district can no longer assume that students are going to show up at the schoolhouse. Therefore, I believe the district needs to find creative ways to increase enrollment and revenues.

We must seek out grants and other alternative funding sources, continue to develop specialized programs like FLAG and expand career/technical education that attract new students, launch a marketing campaign to inform prospective families (private schools, home schools, etc.) about the benefits of our district, establish community partnerships to offer student services that they district can no longer provide, work with neighboring districts to share costs and approve Measure S.

Another significant challenge is effective communication and engagement with the district’s stakeholders – our parents, teachers, classified staff, city councils, neighborhoods, law enforcement, and other community partners. I am committed to the hard work of repairing damaged bridges and building new ones.

Nayiri Nahabedian: California is in the worst budget crisis in her history. In the 1960s, California spent $500 more per student than the national average in educating her children. Now, California spends $1500 less per student than the national average. Our state ranks one of the lowest of the 50 states in funding public education! The state budget directly impacts our ratio of nurses, librarians, coaches and teachers.

As a Board Member, I believe we must continue to work with others to secure fair funding for public education. For example, working with the Five STAR Coalition – a coalition of five neighboring school districts – pooling our resources together and advocating for our students at the local and state levels. Partnering with the California School Boards Association (CSBA) to lobby at the state level, and supporting the PTA in its advocacy in Sacramento for every child are also necessary to secure adequate funding.

At the same time, here at home, we cannot wait for the state to save us. We must be proactive in making things better! One way to do this is to support Measure S. Measure S will help us provide a 21st Century education for our students and ensure students are not neglected as the result of the state’s economic crisis and declining revenues. The bond will give our community the resources we need to improve education and prepare each student for the jobs of tomorrow, today!

Lastly, there are ways for our district to be more effective independent of dollars. This means being attentive every day to every student – in the classroom, the cafeteria, the field and the playground. Individual attention to students is vital to their learning and well-being. The attention of a teacher, a counselor or a coach is critical for our students to feel connected to their school and their education.

Dan Cabrera: The major challenge facing our schools is the decrease in funds available. There are three reasons for this shortage:

a) The California economy has slowed. A $25 billion budget deficit is looming. Proposition 98 requires that 40% of California’s budget must be spent on education, so any drop in state budgeted funds means less money for schools.

b) Glendale school enrollment is falling. The 2010-11 enrollments are down 350 students compared to last year. Each student brings about $5000 Average Daily Attendance (ADA) funds to GUSD. ADA funds constitute 60% of our school funds. The loss of 350 students means about $1.75 M less money for our schools.

c) Home values and property tax assessments have fallen. Since property taxes contribute about 23% of school funds, this trend also hurts school funding.

My plans to increase the funds available for our schools must include two elements: (1) getting more money by actively lobbying our legislature to allow Gov. Brown’s plan to extend temporary state taxes to come to the voters; (2) passing Bond Measure S for facilities and technology.

3) Glendale district is unique in the diverse student population it serves. How do you avoid painting all the schools in the district with one brush or do you feel universal district policies are more productive?

Todd Hunt: As the father of four, I fundamentally understand that all children are unique. What works for one child typically doesn’t work for the others. Glendale Unified has a wonderfully diverse student population, from our students with special needs to our many and varied ethnic cultures and languages. This obviously presents challenges but I believe it is our moral obligation to provide the best possible education to every student, every day. As your board member, I will always champion policies that focus on the individual student, seeking strategies and methods that provide the most effective instruction. We cannot take universal, one-size-fits-all approach.

To accomplish this, we have to collaborate with the parents, teachers, and administrators to ensure that each child is known and supported. We must analyze the metrics to evaluate the progress of every child and provide intervention programs if a child is falling behind.

We must work harder to close the achievement gaps in our ethnic sub-groups.  These children deserve a bright future and I am committed to finding solutions to this ongoing problem.

We also need to understand that we have a large and geographically diverse district. The school clusters centered around our high schools are all unique, with different needs and challenges.

Being that I was born and raised in the Hoover area and am now raising my children in the CV area, I will bring a fresh perspective to the board. I will make sure that all voices are heard to insure that the district is making the best decisions for all our students and families.

Lastly, I will bring the perspective of a parent with children who have progressed through the entire district K-12. It’s important to know the differences between the primary and secondary grades and understand the impact of policies on each group.

Nayiri Nahabedian: Balance and flexibility are key to meeting the needs of each student; it is the same for meeting the needs of each school.

The district does and should have policies that are district-wide – policies regarding benchmark testing, open enrollment, weapons on campus, harassment and drug use. However, balance and flexibility are important for each student and each school site to succeed. School Site Councils are a good example: through School Site Councils, a school determines its specific needs and resources and can make site-based decisions such as purchasing an additional librarian or coaching hours.

The best examples of a school community coming together and creating a unique program for its students is Prom Plus and the CV Drug and Alcohol Prevention Coalition. Through the Coalition, CVHS now offers a voluntary drug-testing program for CV students. This is a unique program to CVHS and is the result of CV parents, community and CVHS working together to determine the needs of our students in the CV area.

Dan Cabrera: On a philosophical level, I believe one of our democracy’s greatest strengths is access to a free and public education for all. As a member of the 2015 Strategic Planning Committee, I suggested one of the possible mottos for our schools: “Every Child. Every Day.” I meant that. As a teacher, one of my greatest joys was seeing students that were academically challenged slowly begin to succeed. On a practical level, No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation governing school progress stipulates that a school’s Academic Performance Index (API) must include Standards Testing improvements for all significant student populations. It is this part of the requirements that most often results in a school being classified as underperforming: one ethnic group does not improve its percent of proficient students.

Therefore, we must have universal district policies about the attention paid to the success of all students groups, especially those that seem to be falling behind.

Next week we’ll present responses by the remaining candidates.

By Jason KUROSU

The future was the focus of the GUSD Board of Education meeting on March 1 and the immediate future appeared to have the board members equally optimistic and concerned.

In past meetings, recommendations for the 2015 Strategic Plan were presented to the board. This week, all that was planned was to establish the plan’s motto (a matter which was delayed for another day.) However, the enthusiasm over the focus of the Strategic Plan was evident.

Board member Mary Boger praised the Plan’s emphasis on students in its wording. Each of the Strategic Plan’s directions begin with the word “students,” as the Plan outlines what skills teachers, administrators and students themselves want GUSD students to acquire.

Other positive future plans include new building developments at schools such as Mark Keppel Elementary and R.D. White Elementary. The developments at each school fall under similar areas of interest. These include removing many of the bungalows currently used as classrooms and developing two story buildings at each campus. Additional developments include new tracks and fields with artificial turf.

However, after the excitement of new developments in student standards and improvements to school facilities, harsher realities were brought back to light. In the Board’s 2011-12 budget update, talk again revolved around California’s recent budget cuts and the potential effects on the school district.

Eva Lueck, Chief Business and Financial Officer of the District, presented some of the possible directions the district could go after suffering the brunt of the cuts.

“The best case scenario would be what we call flat funding. This would cut about $460,000.”

This scenario would occur if the tax extensions proposed by Governor Jerry Brown are voted through in a June election. If not, what could follow is Scenario 2: cuts of about $8 million. The California Legislative Analyst Office’s projection is much grimmer, calculating cuts to be around $20 million.

Down the line, the cuts would increase, but Lueck presented that Scenario 1 would lead to a cut of $8.9 million in the 2013-14 year, whereas Scenario 2 would lead to a $33.6 million cut and the LAO’s projection to a whopping $68.8 million.

Concerning the LAO’s projection, Lueck said, “If that were to happen, we would not have a school district afloat.”

Still, other factors had to be taken into account before panicking. The June tax extensions have obviously still not been voted on. Another topic of interest to this point is the bond measure, Measure S. If voted in at an April 5th election, the measure would supply the district with $20 million. If the June tax extensions don’t make it to the ballot, Measure S will be key.

Board member Joylene Wagner said, “Measure S will not solve everything, but it will give us the breathing room we so desperately need.”

The future for the district is uncertain in some ways but the considerable impact of upcoming elections is a certainty.

By Brandon HENSLEY

The governor’s budget proposal for the 2011-12 fiscal year was discussed at Tuesday’s Glendale Unified School District board meeting, creating an atmosphere of uncertainty for its members.

The state is in a $25 billion deficit currently, and GUSD is just one of many districts seeking more federal funding.

GUSD board president Greg Krikorian said layoffs for teachers might have to come. Notices would be issued in March.

But decisions like layoffs and spending cuts rely on which option succeeds in the state’s budget plan.

The first option is called flat funding, which is best for the district. If state legislature and the voters pass this plan in June, GUSD funding would be cut by “only” $460,000, according to chief financial officer Eva Lueck.

Under the second option, if that election fails, the district could see a loss of around $8.8 million – $8.3 million in revenue – per year for the next several years.

“Should we be making reductions and laying people off because we truly don’t know if we’re $460,000 down or $8.8 million?” asked Lueck.

Glendale has to submit a budget by June 30.

Krikorian referenced to the board an L.A. Times article this week about the Pasadena School District seeking a 10% utility credit, which is something Glendale might do.

“So it’s a fact that we can’t give up on these efforts,” Krikorian said.

Krikorian also said the California of Social Services awarded $900,000 spread out to five other state school districts, and that Glendale was on the short list before being rejected. Krikorian added that he was glad his staff was working hard to seek alternatives like these.

The district still has the hope of Measure S, which could be approved this year, and would generate $270 million in federal funds over a decade. Measure S would be used to better school technology, such as science labs and computers.

The budget would also have an impact on EEELP classes (Early Education and Extended Learning Programs). Cuts would include preschool funding, and according to the presentation made by GUSD, “345 students would no longer have state subsidized child care and preschool services districtwide.”

Board member Mary Boger was not pleased about this.

“I sincerely hope that anyone and everyone who’s watching at home will make it a priority to contact our assembly members that is not appropriate for us to allow these children to be impacted in this way,” she said. “It is not what civilized people do.”

By Brandon HENSLEY

Members of the Glendale Unified School District were on hand during the CV Town Council meeting on Jan. 20 to further inform parents and other residents of the new
bond measure the district hopes will pass on the April 5 ballot.

Inside the La Crescenta Library community room Superintendent Dr. Richard Sheehan and Deputy Superintendent John Garcia presented a slideshow explaining why Measure S is needed for the area’s schools.

Sheehan said since 2002, all of the local schools – from elementary to high school – have shown progress in test scores.

“Several of our schools rank in the top 10% nationally,” Sheehan said. “Twenty-three of the GUSD campuses are California Distinguished schools, we have National Blue Ribbon schools but beyond that they offer so much more.”

But the “so much more” part now needs improving. Measure K was passed in 1997, giving funding to Glendale schools to improve buildings and school technology.

Now Measure S is here. It would generate around $270 million, and no new taxes would be added to residents. The state would also not be allowed to take away any of the funds, which is important considering the current budget of GUSD.

Sheehan said the district is spending $19 million more a year than the state is giving them.

“The state budget is so uncertain from year to year, we don’t know what to plan for,” he said.

A big upgrade for CV High School would be the science labs. The school’s labs were updated several years before Measure K passed, said Garcia, so those labs have not been updated now for 20 years.

“Here we are 13 years after [Measure K],” said Garcia, “they’re now outdated. It’s a traditional science lab and that’s fine but that’s not where science is these days. You can do virtual dissections; you can do labs with partners all over the globe.”

The district hosted a tech-fair on Tuesday at CV High to demonstrate the need for new technology. On Feb. 8, teachers from CV, Clark and Hoover High School will go to Mt. San Antonio College to observe that school’s science labs, which are on the cutting edge according to Sheehan.

Measure S money would also go into school security, including lighting and fencing.

As far as energy goes, Garcia said the big push is toward solar energy, which would alleviate utility bills the district pays.

“That technology continues to move very, very quickly and is becoming more cost-efficient,” said Garcia.

In the end, Garcia also said property values are tied to the reputation of area schools, and the goal is to keep Glendale and La Crescenta a desired place to raise a family.

“Relatively speaking, in the last year the real estate values in Glendale and La Crescenta increased about 1.25%, and that is in marked contrast to the vast majority of L.A. County,” said Garcia.

Toward the beginning of the meeting, council corresponding secretary Robbyn Battles presented certificates of appreciation to the area’s elementary school’s crossing guards, who stood up in a line and received a big round of applause.

“Every single day, for about 33 minutes a day, these people take so much abuse and step in front of cars. They get yelled at. They do the most important thing and that is to protect the safety of our children.”

This was also the first official meeting for the newly sworn in members of the Town Council, as President Cheryl Davis officially introduced members Odalis Suarez, Dr. Young Suh, Harry Leon and Charly Shelton.

The next Town Council meeting will be held inside the La Crescenta Library community room on Feb. 17 at 7 p.m.

School board president, members, attend Measure S kickoff.

By Jason KUROSU

“Public education is at a very important crossroads,” announced GUSD Board President Greg Krikorian as he addressed a gathering of parents, educators and residents on Jan. 19 at the Phoenician Restaurant in Glendale.

“It’s not a laughing matter when we’re talking about possibly closing schools,” Krikorian added, referring to the recent closures of Burbank and Loma Alta Elementary, two schools within the Pasadena Unified School District. “We’re [California] funded 47th or 48th out of 50 states. We can’t leave it up to Sacramento to take care of our facilities.”

Krikorian was speaking before the crowd on behalf of the “Yes 4 S” campaign for a new bond measure, similar to that of Measure K, which was passed back in 1997 and helped to finance construction at several school sites. Measure S, if voted in with a 55% approval at an April 5 election, would allow for similar funding to school facilities across the district.

Among those in attendance were GUSD superintendent Dick Sheehan, former superintendent Michael Escalante and co-chairs of the School Facilities Bond Committee, which put together the “Yes 4 S” campaign, Harry Hull, a broker and Glendale resident and Mary Boger, a GUSD board member. All took their turns at the microphone addressing the crowd concerning the state of education and praising Measure S.

“It’s a cause you should be behind,” said Hull. “If you own a business here, you should be behind it. If you own a home here, you should be behind it. If you have a child in our schools, you should be behind it.”

Speaking to the specifics of the measure, Hull noted that “Measure S is fiscally conservative, in that the tax rate will not fluctuate, which is unusual in a bond measure.” Hull was referring to the property tax rates that help fund the measure, which Hull estimated to be about “$46 per $100,000.” The rates will not increase during the measure’s tenure, but rather remain an extension of the property tax rate set by Measure K.

While the state of education has been a hot topic due to the recently proposed budget by Governor Jerry Brown, which includes a plethora of cuts to state services, Hull insists that the budget had no effect on the push for Measure S.

“We would have done this anyway,” said Hull.

As Hull spoke to the crowd about the benefits of the measure, he added that, “I have five reasons to support Measure S.” Then he went on to list the names of his five grandchildren.

By Robin GOLDSWORTHY and Brandon HENSLEY

The last issue of the year offers a chance to reflect on those events that impacted the Crescenta Valley. This was a year that provided plenty of opportunity to lend a hand – whether to our neighbors who suffered loss due to fire or to an iconic tree in danger of being felled. Typical of those who live and work here, the community rose to each occasion, which is why most consider it a privilege to call the Crescenta Valley “home.”

By Jason KUROSU

The last GUSD board of education meeting of 2010 was kicked off in holiday fashion Tuesday. The boardroom was adorned with wreaths and Christmas lights and the meeting began with a caroling performance by the Crescenta Valley High Charismatics.

The holiday spirit was furthered appropriately by a series of gifts. School board members Mary Boger, Greg Krikorian, Joylene Wagner and Christine Walters were awarded a certificate from the California School Board Association, congratulating them for completing the CSBA’s Masters in Governance Program. After that, a $50,000 donation from Pacific BMW to the Glendale Educational Foundation was presented.

Once the public communications portion of the meeting took place, things quickly got back down to business, and the meeting came to revolve around a theme present in many past school board meetings and around the district in general: finances, and specifically the new General Obligation Bond titled the Quality Schools Protection Act that many hope to see on the ballot at the upcoming April election.

Speakers addressed the board with their perspectives on the bond measure. Many of the speakers were, as expected, parents of children in the district, but most of them were also teachers. Much of the teacher’s support for the bond measure is due to the funds from the measure being allocated towards improving school facilities and acquiring more advanced equipment and technology for the classrooms.

Carolyn Williams, a first grade teacher at Mark Keppel Elementary, spoke of the measure helping the school attain top quality classroom facilities, rather than having to teach in bungalows, as she does.

“Mark Keppel fully supports the school board in approving this bond,” Williams said. “It will improve schools and keep class sizes down. The upgrade would improve the quality of education for all of our students.”

Ryan Hobbs, a special education teacher at Toll Middle School, impressed upon the board that better technology in the classrooms is not only good for replacing outdated equipment, but better engages the students in lessons. He detailed the advantages of technology such as Smart Boards, interactive whiteboards that work like large touchpads, and which Hobbs uses in his class.

“These are necessary tools to increase student engagement and prepare students for a future in which advanced technology of this nature will be an essential part of their lives,” said Hobbs.

Almost all the speakers, including the members of the school board, expressed their support for putting the bond measure on the ballot.

However, Glendale Teacher’s Union President Tami Carlson, while understanding the teachers’ optimism, expressed some wariness over the bond measure.

“Teachers should realize that they won’t have a say in what’s done with the money [from the bond measure],” Carlson said. While some of the teachers spoke of noticeable improvements to their classrooms and schools after the passing of Measure K, Carlson made reference to teachers who saw improvements to the main buildings of their schools, but were themselves removed to bungalows to teach their classes.

“Who makes the decisions with the money? I don’t know, but it’s not the teachers.”

Carlson also said that the measure would necessitate a tax hike.

“I am loath to tell the taxpayers to support a tax hike, especially when we are in an economic crisis,”she said.

However, GUSD representatives have stated numerous times that the bond measure would not create a tax hike, and that property rates would remain the same.

In the end the board unanimously voted to place the measure on the April 5 ballot. If approved the Act will generate about $270 million to repair and upgrade district schools without increasing tax rates beyond the fiscal year 2009-10. The entire cost is deductible on state and federal taxes, according to district officials.

By Jason KUROSU

Starting at the beginning of the Glendale Unified School District’s second quarter – Nov. 2 – approximately 50 students from Glendale High School and Hoover High School transferred to Crescenta Valley High.  This is an extension of the ideas developed in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, a bill which emphasized education reform based on standards assessed through statewide tests such as the STAR test in California.

The U.S. Department of Education determines a school’s progress by measuring its AYP or Adequate Yearly Progress, which is determined by a series of benchmarks. If a school does not meet the designated AYP for two consecutive years, the school is identified for Program Improvement, meaning that the school will be required to carry out reforms to meet the standards. Glendale High and Hoover High are Program Improvement schools this year, which was what led to the transfers of students to Crescenta Valley High, as Program Improvement schools are required to allow alternative attendance opportunities for their students. No Child Left Behind’s designations for Program Improvement mandate that with each subsequent year that the school fails to meet the AYP, the reforms become more and more substantial, including the possibility of replacing the school’s entire staff or even closing the school down.

However, GUSD Deputy Superintendent John Garcia sees the standards and the Program Improvement designation as misleading in its evaluation of a school’s success or failure.

“Glendale and Hoover are both great schools,” Garcia said. “But they operate under a flawed system, with students that don’t speak English as a primary language. These things make it difficult to meet the standards.”

A flawed system, because Program Improvement schools may actually be improving, even though they didn’t meet the AYP standards. For instance, Hoover actually improved from 2009 in the statewide API scores, but because English language learners did not meet the AYP, Hoover is Program Improvement.

Glendale’s API score declined by only a single point, but because English language learners did not meet the AYP two years in a row, Glendale High is Program Improvement as well.

Crescenta Valley, on the other hand, only increased its API scores by three points, compared to Hoover’s 10 point improvement. Also, Crescenta Valley’s English learner subgroup, like those of Hoover and Glendale, did not meet its AYP target. But because the subgroup did not fail to meet its target for two consecutive years, the school was not designated as Program Improvement.

“If at least 57% of any subgroup in the school did not meet its target, the school becomes a Program Improvement school,” Garcia said.

A subgroup is a group that represents at least 15% of a school’s total population and is made up of at least 50 students. While the schools reached AYP targets in some of the subgroups, it takes only one not meeting its target to have the entire school fail to meet its mark. Even more concerning is that the proficiency targets only increase year by year.

“By 2014, the AYP target is 100%,”Garcia said, “as in it’s expected that 100% of the students in every school in the district will meet the AYP proficiency targets in English and math or else become Program Improvement schools. It’s unrealistic.”

By Jason KUROSU

GUSD schools are adjourning for the holidays at a noticeably later date than usual: Dec. 23. The winter break will go through the first week of January so that students will return to class on Monday, Jan. 10. The shift of about a week in the starting and ending dates of the winter break may have some parents confused and surprised as they plan their winter vacations.

Deputy Superintendent John Garcia offered a few reasons as to the scheduling.

“Whenever Christmas falls on a weekend, there’s always a decision on whether to set the break closer or farther to Christmas.”

Indeed, Dec. 25 falls on a Saturday this year. Usual scheduling would have schools leave for the break the previous week – Friday, Dec. 17 – and returning to school sometime the week of Jan. 3 to Jan. 7. But while beginning the winter break that early was not considered optimal, ending the winter break around Jan. 3 was not either, but for wholly different reasons.

“At the district, we get paid based on average daily attendance,” Garcia said. Average Daily Attendance is a statistic calculated by dividing the total number of days of student attendance by the number of days of school is taught.

“A significant portion of families whose children attend our schools celebrate Orthodox Christmas,” Garcia noted, referring to Jan. 6, a day when many Orthodox Christians celebrate Christmas rather than on Dec. 25. “Many of these families take their vacations around the 6th and we’ve noticed a trend of higher absence rate on and around the 6th. So the calendar was scheduled this way to maximize average daily attendance.”

The schedule could change in future years to an early start calendar. Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources David Samuelson said, “We think the early start calendar will come into effect during the 2012-13 year. This will give students more time to prepare for finals at the end of January and AP tests in the spring.”

For now though, the schedules remain the same, but with this slightly modified winter break. Adjust vacation schedules accordingly.