Date: Tuesday, February 13, 2009
Time: 3:00 p.m.
Location: Deloitte, 5250 N. Palm, Suite 300, Fresno, CA
Systems and Infrastructure Workgroup Meeting
Participants:
-
Marianne Dunklin
-
Blake Packard
-
Doug Reitz
-
Jorge Aguilar
-
Kirk Whitney
-
Yolanda Juarez
-
Ken Newby
-
Matt Ward
-
Sally Fowler
-
Sharon Hart
1. After brief introductions, Sally Fowler shared the Systems and Infrastructure Workgroup Discussion Plan. The group reviewed the plan and future meeting dates.
2. Sally Fowler then passed out draft discussion recommendations regarding future pathways and courses compiled from notes taken during the January 30th workgroup meeting followed by draft discussion recommendations regarding desired counseling components compiled from notes taken during the February 3rd workforce meeting. The discussion centered on a need for guiding principles, and consideration that all students must graduate prepared with the math, English, and basic skills necessary for success upon exiting high school.
3. Kirk Whitney discussed course options for students enrolled in FUSD. A student can enroll in 36 courses over their 4 years of high school. 20 of those courses are graduation requirements. 33 of the 36 courses are college entrance requirements for students interested in attending a CSU or UC. Discussion of the workgroup centered on how our District needs to focus on College “and” Career not College “or” Career. Every course must be engaging and have the relevance and rigor to allow our students to have choice upon graduation. Some of our CTE courses need to meet the college entrance requirements so that our students may take advantage of the engaging practices offered in CTE courses/pathways.
4. Marianne Dunklin form FCC asked the question, “Should students even know if the course they are taking is college prep?” Discussion continued on courses development and college entrance requirements. Jorge Agular shared that our District needs our courses to be evaluated and reconciled against the A-G criteria.
5. Ken Newby then lead the workgroup in a discussion of how Systems/Infrastructure workgroup topics could be divided into categories, the list of the main categories follows:
A. Product
Pathways/Courses
Program Outcomes/Industry Certification
Faculty/Collaboration
Facilities/Equipment
Articulation with Higher Ed./Other Districts
B. Process
Scheduling
Counseling Systems
Mentoring
Assessment Systems
Information Systems
Onramp/Enrollment Systems
C. Drivers and Levers
Policies
Leadership/Oversight
Funding
Administration
Education Code/Funding Policies
D. Outcomes
Parents/Students
Community/Industry Partners
Communication Systems
6. Jorge Agular expressed a desire and need to evaluate our CTE courses against A-G and other criteria to be recommended by the workgroup and commission members. In the mean time, to demonstrate the value of the process a few courses will be selected by District staff to demonstrate the process of reconciling a few courses against the A-G criteria. Course reconciliation results will be brought to the February 27th workgroup meeting.
7. Much discussion by workgroup members revolved around course evaluation, course rigor, student engagement, current course offerings, program of study efforts, etc. The following topics were discussed as possible criteria areas to be used to evaluate courses:
Local Job Market information, Course Rigor, Course Sequencing, Certification or Course Outcomes, Articulation, A-G Qualifications, Student Interests, and the Ability of students to meet Skills Requirements.
8. Ken Newby recorded the following priorities the workgroup will use as guiding principals as they progress with their work:
Provide the widest array for courses
Keep students in school as long a possible
Priority should be placed on transferable knowledge development
Career Readiness Continuum
Awareness → Prepatory → Execution
Pre-pathway preparation
In addition, much discussion took place regarding the need to develop career awareness practices, policies, and activities in grades K-6. The need to add applied or project based instructional practices in remediation courses, elementary grades, middle school classes, and high school CTE and academic courses continued. The workgroup members clearly saw a need to enhance current instructional practices to show students the relevance of what they are learning.
9. Changes in instruction or courses will lead to a need for appropriate teacher recruitment, training, collaboration practices, and course curriculum alignment and development.
The next meeting of the Commission on Workforce Readiness and Career Technical Education is scheduled for Wednesday, February 18 at the UC Center (550 East Shaw Avenue, across from Fashion Fair, east of the 41 freeway). The meeting will begin at 2:30pm, a Systems and Infrastructure Workgroup meeting will follow the “Best Practice” presentations.