Joint Committee to Develop a Master Plan for Education
Footnotes
1 J.P. Shonkoff and D.A. Phillips, Eds., From Neurons to Neighborhoods (2001)
2 Children Now, The California County Data Book 2001, (Oakland, CA. 2001).
3 California School Readiness Task Force, Here They Come: Ready or Not! Report of the School Readiness Task Force, California Department of Education, (Sacramento, CA., 1988)
4 Universal Preschool Task Force, Ready To Learn: Quality Preschools for California in the 21st Century, California Department of Education, (Sacramento, CA., 1998)
5 These Studies include: D. Gullo, "The Long-Term Educational Effects of Half-Day versus Full-School-Day Kindergarten", Early Child Development and Care, 160: 17-24 (2000); Y.L. Wang and G.W. Johnstone, "Evaluation of a Full-School-Day Kindergarten Program", ERS Spectrum, 17 (2): 27-32 (1999).
6 Robert H. McCabe, Sewing a Seamless Education System, (April 2001).
7 R. Shore, Ready Schools, Washington, D.C.: National Education Goals Panel, (1998).
8 California Teachers Association (2000). Low-Performing Schools = High Priority Schools: Analysis of 2000 Academic Performance Index. Sacramento, CA.
9 California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (2001). Teachers Meeting Standards for Professional Certification in California: Second Annual Report. Sacramento, CA.
10 Vartan Gregorian, "Teacher Education Must Become Colleges' Central Preoccupation", The Chronicle of Higher Education, (August 17, 2001).
11 See "Increasing the Role of the Business and Higher Education Communities in Preparing Our Nation's Teachers: A Business-Higher education Forum Initiative." The National Business Alliance. (2001)
12 The Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning, The Status of the Teaching Profession 2000, (2001)
13 Grant funding would be an 'Initiatives' adjustment to the adequate base of funding recommended by the California Quality Education Model of school finance.
14 The cost of additional professional development days would be built into the adequate base of funding recommended by the California Quality Education Model of school finance.
15 The cost of additional instructional days would be a 'Student Characteristic' adjustment to the adequate base of funding recommended by the California Quality Education Model of school finance.
16 Grant funding would be an 'Initiatives' adjustment provided to selected districts or schools to the adequate base of funding recommended by the California Quality Education Model of school finance.
18 "Temporary faculty" is used in this Plan to refer to non-tenured or tenure-track, non-permanent faculty. Temporary faculty may be full- or part-time and may be referred to as adjunct, or limited-term faculty.
19 We also recommend that, to keep the State's content standards current with the changing context, the State establish an ongoing, intersegmental process of review and revision of the standards to ensure their quality and their relevance to students and to the needs of California.
20 For details on a Learning Support System, see Adelman & Taylor, "Addressing barriers to learning: Beyond school-linked services and full service schools", American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 67, p. 408-421, (1997); Adelman, Taylor, & Schneider, "A school-wide component to address barriers to learning", Reading and Writing Quarterly, 15, p. 277-302, (1999).
21 National Association of Elementary School Principals, "Is There a Shortage of Qualified Candidates for Openings in the Principalship? An Exploratory Study". Cited 23 Jan. 2002. http://www.naesp.org/ContentLoad.do?contentId=1097
22 EdSource, with data from NCES, determined that there was one principal and/or assistant principal for every 504 students in California in 2001, ranking it last among the states.
23 Partnership for Community College Leadership. Meeting New Leadership Challenges in the Community Colleges. Paper prepared by the Community College Leadership Development Initiative and Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA, (September 2000).
24 Piland, W., & Phillips, B. Long-Range Administrator Needs Projections: Preparing the Next Generation of Community College Leaders - Facilitating Institutional Development. Paper prepared for the California Community College Chancellor's Office, Sacramento, CA, (August, 2000).
25 California Postsecondary Education Commission, The Production and Utilization of Education Doctorates for Administrators in California's Public Schools, (December 2000).
26 CDE/It will take an additional 1,123 more counselors per year to reach the national average by 2005.
27 Recruiting New Teachers, Inc. for The Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning, The Essential Profession:California Education at the Crossroads, (2001).
28 The U.S. Department of Justice School Crime Supplement, 1989 and 1995.
29 Kaufman, P., X. Chen, S.P. Choy, K.A. Chandler, C.D. Chapman, M.R. Rand, and C. Ringel, Indicators of SchoolCrime and Safety, NCES 98-251/NCJ-172215, Washington, D.C. (1998).
30 It has been recommended that the State provide a Facilities Master Plan template for districts that need technical assistance, with consideration that funding assistance may be necessary to help those districts create facilities master plans. This recommendation might involve developing a cost estimate upon which to gauge an appropriate level of state financial assistance.
31 See Edward A. Krug, The Shaping of the American High School, Vol. 1, 1880-1920, and Vol. II, 1920-1941, Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, (1969, 1972)
32 Shore, R., Rethinking the Brain: New Insights into Early Development, New York: Families and Work Institute, (1997).
33 Wadsworth B., Piaget's Theory of Cognitive and Affective Development, White Plains, N.Y.: Longman Publishers, (1996).
34 Armistead. M., "The Foundations of Multiple Intelligences,"in Multiple Intelligence, Alexandria, VA.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, (1994)
35 Patrick T. Terenezini and Ernest T. Pascarella, "Living With Myths: Undergraduate Education in America, Change Magazine, January/February, (1994)
36 U.S. Department of Education, Digest of Education Statistics, (1999).
37 California State Department of Education, Demographic Reports, "Graduation Rates by Ethnic Group,"California Education Data System, (December 2001).
38 California State University, Board of Trustees Agenda Item, (January 2001).
40 John A. Douglas, unpublished paper "A Reflection and Prospectus on California Higher Education: The Beginning of a New History,"prepared for the Pat Brown Institute, (February 2002).
41 California Council on Science and Technology, Critical Path Analysis of California's Science and Technology Education System, January 2002).
42 State Higher Education Executive Officers, "Focus on Assessment of Student Learning," Network News, Volume 21, No. 1, (January 2002).
43 See "Assessing Learning Outcomes"on the Measuring Up website.
44 National Commission on the High School Senior Year, The Lost Opportunity of Senior Year: Finding a Better Way, (January 2001).
45 Frank Newman and Jamie Scurry, "Online Technology Pushes Pedagogy to the Forefront," The Chronicle of Higher Education, (July 2001).
46 Rudy Crew, "Rudy Crew: Being Present,"in Converge Magazine, (July 2001).
48 Educational Testing Service, A Measured Response: Americans Speak on Education Reform, (2001).
49 Paul E. Lingenfelter, "Focus on Educational Accountability,"Network News, SHEEO, Volume 20, No.3, (November 2001)
50 See recommendations in the Affordability section of this Master Plan for a description of the California Quality Education model.
51 Educational Testing Service, A Measured Response: Americans Speak on Education Reform, (2001).
52 Paul E. Lingenfelter, "Focus on Educational Accountability,"Network News, SHEEO, Volume 20, No.3, (November 2001)
53 See recommendations in the Affordability section of this Master Plan for a description of the California Quality Education model.
54 See David and Lucille Packard Foundation, The Future of Children: Financing Schools, (1997)
55 W. Norton Grubb and Luis A. Huerta, Straw Into Gold, Resources Into Results: Spinning Out the Implications ofthe "New"School Finance, Policy analysis for California Education, Research Series 01-1, (April 2000); P.A. Miniori and S.D. Sugarman, "Educational Adequacy and the Courts: The Promise and Problems of Moving to a New Paradigm,"in H.F. Ladd, R. Chalk, & J.S. Hanson (Eds), Equity and Adequacy in Education Finance: Issuesand Perspectives, (1999).
56 EdSource, How Much is Enough? Funding California's Public Schools, (April 2000).
58 Education Week, (May 22, 1996).
59 American School and University, (April 2000).
60 Community Facility Districts (CDF's) often encompass only part of a school district and their creation is subject to the approval of two-thirds of the landowners within the boundaries of the proposed CDF.
61 While California statute explicitly exempts state residents from paying tuition, it does require payment of mandatory fees that vary for the California Community College system, the California State University system, and the University of California. All three public systems are permitted to charge non-residents tuition, defined as the full cost of providing education, including cost of faculty salary and benefits.
62 California Postsecondary Education Commission, Fiscal Profiles 2001, Commission Report 02-1, (January 2002).
63 EdSource, California's School Finance System, (December 1999).
65 Elizabeth G. Hill, A New Blueprint for California School Facility Finance, (May 2001)
66 State appropriations have averaged the cost differences of high-cost programs like nursing into the per FTE appropriations for each system. It also builds in cost differences associated with the different missions assigned to the CCC, CSU, and UC.
67 See recommendations contained in the final report of the Joint Committee's Working Group on Postsecondary Education Finance for further rationale for these financing goals.
68 District characteristic adjustments are intended to address such needs as transportation and weather challenges resulting from the geographic locations of school districts, rather than differences in the cost of living in different areas of the state.
69 Because of the Serrano v. Priest provisions, it is important that the State take steps to ensure that districts successfully pursuing local revenue options would not generate fiscal conditions between districts that were grossly unequal and would result in inequitable opportunities to learn throughout the state.
71 The standards of adequacy referred to here are consistent with recommendation 20 in the Access section of this Master Plan.
72 While the strongest surge of enrollments will occur through approximately 2010, there is no decline projected thereafter, so that the facilities constructed for additional enrollments will not be surplus.
73 California Postsecondary Education Commission, Regional Higher Education Enrollment Demand Study, (December 2001)
74 Commerce Department, Falling Through the Net: Defining the Digital Divide, (1999).
75 Committee on Economic Development, Preschool for All, p. 59.
[Previous] |
[Next] |