Follow Adult Education Matters on Feedspot

Continue with Google
Continue with Facebook

CCAE is the California Council of Adult Education.  It is the only organization that includes students, staff, teachers, administrators, and community members.

California is the fifth largest economy in the world.  It has a lot of money.  Adult Education and Adult Schools do not have enough money.

Now is the time to ask legislators - the people we choose to represent us - to spend our taxes on Adult Education and Adult Schools.

Here is info from CCAE:

Contact Your Legislators

As you may know, on Friday the Governor released his May Revise Budget proposal for FY 18-19.  We are pleased to report and strongly support the package which continues to include a COLA for adult education, provide language to cap the indirect rate districts can charge back to adult schools, and provide an extra year for development of consortia three-year plans.  Unfortunately, the Administration and Department of Finance (DOF) opted not to include the remaining priorities the adult education field strongly advocated for so as to continue to move adult education forward under the Adult Education Block Grant.
While not included in the Governor's May Revise, we still have the opportunity to affect the outcome of the final budget.  In this regard, we strongly urge all teachers, classified staff, students, administrators, family, friends, and other supportive individuals to send an email to your respective Senator and Assemblymember urging them to voice the need for 1) additional funding for adult education, 2) inclusion of immigrant integration metrics in the AEBG, and to 3) change the term "Grant" in the Adult Education Block Grant.
Click the link and scroll down to "Send an Email."

Additionally, we strongly urge you to also call your respective Senator and Assemblymember's Sacramento and District offices urging them to let the Budget Committees know that their community and constituents strongly support more funding to support adult education and the beneficial, life-changing impact it has on our students and their families.
Click the link and scroll down to "Make a Phone Call" to access your state representative's office numbers.

Read Full Article
Visit website
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 

Student Success: Isela Jimenez  
Submitted by Northern Section  

When you walk into Folsom Cordova Community Partnership Job Center, located on the Folsom Cordova Adult School campus, you are greeted with the smiling face of Isela Diaz Jiminez with either a "hello" or an "ola." Isela is an administrative assistant at the Job Center. She is one of Folsom Cordova Adult School's (FCAS) many shining success stories. Isela started out in FCAS's Adult Basic Education to work on her math, reading, and writing and to prepare for the HiSET Class. After about a year Isela passed the HiSET tests and set her sights on the office Technologies CTE pathway. At FCAS she completed Office Technologies along with the QuickBooks Certification. After graduating and receiving the office certifications, Isela started an internship at the Job Center. Eventually, she was promoted to a full-time paying job with benefits. Isela is extremely helpful at the Job Center-helping job candidates find the resources and staff that will help them on the next step in their employment path. Isela could have settled for a minimum wage job, but she pushed herself to pass the HiSET and get the Office Technologies Certification. This is what FCAS is all about-determining students' goals and getting them on the pathway to achieving their goals.    

Download FREE posters and fact sheets (samples below) HERE. 
Take Action for Adult Education
Engage your legislators, assembly members, and senators. There has not been a time in over 10 years when both legislative support and state funding have lined up so positively for adult education. Thanks to the recent work of our advocate, Dawn Koepke, and other key adult education supporters there is a state level interest in adult education. But that interest can quickly fade as other organizations also lobby for funding. Now is the time to engage locally. Visit your legislators. Call or email their offices. Speak with the staff. Let them know how important adult education is to your community and the students you serve. Listen to the CCAE key talking points here
Engage your consortia. Much of the positive feedback we receive is around the work that is being done collaboratively with partner organizations in our regional consortia. We have come a long way to build relationships, create pathways to college and career, leverage funds and resources, and bring back services to adult learners. This collaborative work is providing adult school students opportunities for advancement that were not present or clearly available before. In addition, significant investments into student support services have also been made across programs. We must continue these collaborative efforts, and other promising practices, and truly create the seamless pathways and accelerated learning programs that our students need and that our state needs. In this way we will continue to demonstrate the superior value of adult education. Also, plan to join us on CCAE's annual Legislative Day in Sacramento, April 9-10. This year we're planning an Adult Education Rally on the steps of the Capitol Building. Materials for local and Sacramento visits are on the CCAE website here. You are free to print out all of these materials yourself. These materials are the ones referenced in the webinar sited below. Watch for additional information regarding Leg Day soon!
Engage your CCAE State Board. In order to best plan for the coming year, the CCAE State Board has embarked on a strategic planning process that will gather input from all aspects of the organization. A vital component of that input is your voice. Please take a few minutes to give us feedback here
Engage your students. Of course, you already engage your students every day they are in class. But what I am talking about is engaging them a little deeper. What are their plans for the next year? What are their challenges? What jobs are they considering? What other schools are they considering attending? As we move into the world of increased accountability it is becoming more important to build strong relationships with our students so that we can better support them, possibly providing or connecting them to additional resources, but also better measure and report their successes. In many ways, those who engage with students frequently might be the most important component of the accountability system being developed.
Again, now is the time to engage. Next month might just be too late. Next week might be too late. Don't wait for someone else to stand up for you, your school, and your students. Now is the time to stand up and make your voice heard.
Leg Day Webinar
Watch our archived edition of the Leg Day webinar to ensure you have the tools you need to hold successful and productive legislative visits: HERE.
Finish Your Diploma 
Would you like your program to be listed so that thousands of potential adult students can learn about and access your adult program's services? Add your program here.  
CALPRO Professional Development
Enjoy outstanding professional development offered by our partner, CALPRO.  
April Highlights HERE
April Flyer HERE.
OTAN Professional Development
View the list of OTAN training sessions being offered in April and May HERE

                                           To register click HERE
We Have a Great CCAE Conference Line-Up! 

Check out the conference sessions HERE.
Register and sign up for events HERE.
Make your hotel reservations HERE.
The cost of the conference is generously underwritten by our sponsors HERE. This enables us to pass the savings on to you, our members.
Read Full Article
Visit website
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 
The LAO - the Legislative Analyst Office - has recommended getting rid of the K-12 Adult School credential.  (Read more here.)

Please take this survey to share your own opinion and ideas on this topic.

The survey will be closed at the end of April and results will be shared here on the Adult Education Matters blog.

Read Full Article
Visit website
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 

It's time to contact your local legislators and Governor Jerry Brown and advocate for including immigrant integration as part of AEBG - the Adult Ed Block Grant. 

The challenges that the Trump administration have brought upon us have also brought a deeper understanding of the value of immigrants in California and the importance of supporting immigrant integration through Adult Education.

Both the California Immigrant Policy Center and CCAE - the California Council of Adult Education - are advocating for this important change to happen.  

Contact your local legislators and Governor Jerry Brown.  Explain to them why immigrant integration matters.

Here is information from the California Immigrant Policy Center and from CCAE about advocating for including immigrant integration into AEBG. 

California Immigrant Policy Center

Workforce Development & Adult Education
Administrative Advocacy & Budget Advocacy
CIPC is continuing our advocacy for equity within California’s adult education and workforce development programs and funding at a local and statewide level. In 2018, we are weighing in on budget proposals from adult education and workforce development stakeholders for increased employment training and services. These include adding “immigrant integration” metrics to the Adult Education Block Grant and funding the Breaking Barriers to Employment Act (AB 1111, 2017).
California Immigrant Policy Center March 13th, 2018 Update

Update:  Governor Brown's 2018 Budget & New Proposals -

Adult Education & Workforce Development
Adult Education Block Grant -
The Adult Education Block Grant (AEBG) is an important source of state funding to programs and services that provide adults with the knowledge needed to be prepared for the workforce, such as English language courses, GED attainment, and vocational skills. These programs also support integration and inclusion outcomes for immigrants not seeking employment training but adult education services that support their engagement in community and civic life. This year’s budget continues to sustain the $500 million funding.
  • Budget Proposal: A proposal from adult education stakeholders, the California Council for Adult Education and the California Adult Education Administrators Association, provides a two prong approach to advancing how AEBG funding reaches immigrant communities. The proposal would establish performance based funding that incentives the needs of communities with multiple barriers including limited English proficiency, poverty, and  lack of high school completion, and include “immigrant integration” as a reported outcome for state funding. CIPC will be working with stakeholders and the Legislature

Note:  CCAE - California Council for Adult Education - is recommending that Immigrant Integration metrics are incorporated into AEBG - the Adult Ed Block Grant.

Here is information from CCAE's FY 2018-19 Adult Ed Framework Priorities:

Even as collaboration between the systems expands through regional consortium-building and AEBG, the K-12 community-based adult schools still have as their core mission to serve those low basic skills adults who oftentimes get caught in the remediation of post-secondary education. Additionally, the structural and cultural differences between the two systems have become more evident through this planning process and it is critical that the strengths of each be leveraged in ways that support student learning outcomes and appropriate levels of support services. The adult learners that are best served by K12 adult schools must not be left out.
- AEBG defines the specific outcomes sought – literacy and career progress.
- Serving immigrant adults in need of English language skills have been at the core of the K12 adult education mission since its inception. They come to adult schools to develop literacy, and in doing so, gain cultural competency and literacy more broadly defined as health, financial, digital literacy, parenting and family literacy, and civic engagement, all also critical to successful transition to college and careers.
- Unfortunately, the statute and overall AEBG framework does not explicitly provide for these types of immigrant integration metrics relative to demonstrating outcomes and accountability for student success.
- We are concerned that immigrant students who may not yet have the skills to demonstrate outcomes on the current statutory spectrum that focuses solely on literacy and career progress will be left behind as AEBG entities seek to focus on programming for those students for which clear outcomes and progress can be measured and for which funding may eventually be prioritized.
- The Alliance for Language Learners’ Integration, Education and Success (ALLIES) is an alliance serving the two-county Silicon Valley region of San Mateo and Santa Clara counties. Launched by a grant of the Silicon Valley Community Foundation in 2010, mission of ALLIES is to advance regional economic and social health through high-impact alliances for immigrant educational and career success. Through this work, ALLIES developed an Immigrant Integration Pathway offering an innovative way to identify and measure the critical factors for successful immigrant integration. The pathway includes eight high-level goal areas that are then further broken down into approaches and supporting objectives. The goals are intended to be: o Used by individuals as well as service providers via common metrics that can help assess if an individual is progressing and/or practices are effective;
o Measurable qualitatively and quantitatively;

o Achievable with milestones under reasonable timeframes; and
o A tool for the immigrant to have ownership of their progress, with the ability to see how incremental gains are related to longer-term goals.1

1 ALLIES Immigrant Integration Pathway Framework White Paper, 2017

Using the ALLIES Framework, amend the AEBG statute to explicitly reference and include "immigrant integration metrics" under AEBG.
Amend Education Code Section 84920, as follows:
(a) To the extent that one-time funding is made available in the Budget Act of 2015, consistent with the provisions of Section 84917, the chancellor and the Superintendent shall identify common measures for determining the effectiveness of members of each consortium in meeting the educational needs of adults. At a minimum, the chancellor and the Superintendent shall accomplish both of the following:

(1) Define the specific data each consortium shall collect.

(2) Establish a menu of common assessments and policies regarding placement of adults seeking education and workforce services into adult education programs to be used by each consortium to measure educational needs of adults and the effectiveness of providers in addressing those needs.

(b) No later than August 1, 20178, the chancellor and the Superintendent shall report to the Director of Finance, the State Board of Education, and the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature on options for integrating the assessments described in subdivision (a) into the common assessment system developed pursuant to Section 78219. The report shall address compliance of the assessments with federal and state funding requirements for adult education programs, identify estimated costs

  and timelines for the assessments, and identify changes in policies that may be needed to avoid duplicate assessments.

(c) It is the intent of the Legislature that both of the following occur:

(1) That the educational needs of adults in the state be better identified and understood through better sharing of data across state agencies.

(2) That, at a minimum, the chancellor and the Superintendent shall enter into agreements to share data related to effectiveness of the consortia between their agencies and with other state agencies, including, but not necessarily limited to, the Employment Development Department and the California Workforce Investment Board.

(d) The chancellor and the Superintendent shall identify, no later than January 1, 2016 August 1, 2018, the measures for assessing the effectiveness of consortia that will be used in the report that is required pursuant to Section 84917. These measures shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, all of the following:

(1) How many adults are served by members of the consortium.

(2) How many adults served by members of the consortium have demonstrated the following, as applicable:

(A) Immigrant integration.

(B) Improved literacy skills.

(BC) Completion of high school diplomas or their recognized equivalents.

(CD) Completion of postsecondary certificates, degrees, or training programs.

(DE) Placement into jobs.

(EF) Improved wages.

(e) The chancellor and the Superintendent shall apportion the funds appropriated for purposes of this section in the Budget Act of 2015 in accordance with both of the following:

(1) Eighty-five percent of these funds shall be used for grants to consortia to establish systems or obtain data necessary to submit any reports or data required pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 84917.

(2) Fifteen percent of these funds shall be used for grants for development of statewide policies and procedures related to data collection or reporting or for technical assistance to consortia, or both.

(f) The chancellor and the Superintendent shall provide any guidance to the consortia necessary to support the sharing of data included in systems established by consortia pursuant to this section across consortia.

Here's an example of a very successful program which cultivates immigrant integration.


    Read Full Article
    Visit website
    • Show original
    • .
    • Share
    • .
    • Favorite
    • .
    • Email
    • .
    • Add Tags 
    An example of immigrant integration in action at San Mateo Adult School, a K-12 Adult School:

    New San Mateo Program Educates Immigrants About Local Government
    News Desk, March 19th, 2018

    From the City of San Mateo: A diverse group of immigrants are getting an exclusive look at critical city services as part of the new English as a Second Language (ESL) City Government Academy. The City of San Mateo, in partnership with the San Mateo Adult School of the San Mateo Union High School District, recently launched the program to educate this new segment of the community about how local government works and to empower them to be able to access available resources and programs provided by the City. This first class of 25 students hail from 10 different countries.
    The four-month program, which began in January, aims to expand participants' awareness of local government, and increase civic engagement, leadership and volunteerism.

    "Our key goal is for participants to feel empowered and comfortable accessing City services," said City Manager Larry Patterson, who championed the program's inception. "We are particularly excited to be energizing a new segment of our community to become more civically engaged."
    The program is the brainchild of Stephanie Kriebel, an educator who is herself a graduate of San Mateo's traditional City Services Academy.

    "As an ESL teacher at San Mateo Adult School, I saw an opportunity for us to help bridge the immigrant community we serve with City services to help familiarize our students with what the City does, how it helps the community, and what opportunities lie within the City for them to pursue," Kriebel said.

    Academy participants have an opportunity to meet with City staff and learn about local government while also garnering concrete knowledge and skills to empower them in their everyday lives, such as learning how to operate a fire extinguisher and register for a recreation class. For some, even visiting City facilities is novel. For others, the impact of participating in the Academy runs far deeper.
    "I honestly think I'm so lucky to live in San Mateo because the City of San Mateo organizes so many events and programs for the community. I come from Guatemala originally, and these kinds of programs help me integrate into the community here. Now I have lots of things I can do," said program participant Edwin Turuy.

    Program days include visits to San Mateo's Fire Station 23, Beresford Recreation Center and Park, Police Station, Wastewater Treatment Plant, and City Hall. Future cohorts will also have the opportunity to visit the San Mateo Public Library. The pilot program culminates with a graduation ceremony April 19, 2018.

    Photos courtesy of the City of San Mateo (ESL students learn how to operate a fire extinguisher during a tour of a San Mateo fire station.)
    Read Full Article
    Visit website
    • Show original
    • .
    • Share
    • .
    • Favorite
    • .
    • Email
    • .
    • Add Tags 
    From Kristen Pursley's Save Your Adult School blog:
    The California Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) recently issued an Adult Education Analysis as part of the 2018-2019 budget process. A link to the report is here: http://www.lao.ca.gov/Publications/Detail/3752
    The report recommends eight changes to the adult education system in California. Some of the recommendations are intriguing, others problematic. Just for fun, I’m going to rate them on the following scale:
    Here are the recommendations and their Save Your Adult School ratings:
    1. The adoption of a student ID number that could be used to identify students in both the adult school and community college systems  PROCEED WITH CAUTION
    2. A uniform funding rate for community colleges and adult schools NEED MORE INFORMATION
    3. The elimination of course fees or adoption of a single “nominal” charge ELIMINATION YES,BUT “NOMINAL” CHARGE NO!
    4. A requirement that entities other than adult schools and community colleges that provide adult education (such as libraries) participate in the regional consortia NEED MORE INFORMATION
    5. A portion of state funding for adult education to be based on performance NO
    6. Align assessment and placement policies for community colleges and adult schools YES
    7. No longer require adult school instructors to get a teaching credential, so that any holder of a bachelor’s degree will be qualified to teach adult school NO
    8. Restrict credit instruction at community colleges to college-level coursework YES
    Before we look at the individual recommendations and their possible consequences, let us take a look at the pedigree of the LAO report itself. There are two things to keep in mind.
    Hit the link to read the rest of the post.

    1. This report is part of the state budget process. For years, adult education policy has been made in the context of budgeting, so the policies are essentially fiscal policy rather than education policy. These recommendations are not being made by educators or informed by the thinking of educators.
    2. The report is one of a long line of reports about adult education that exclude input from adult school teachers and students.The current LAO report is a descended from a 2009 study called Adult Education Strategic Planning Process Needs Assessment, produced for the California Department of Education by WestEd. WestEd somehow managed to evaluate the needs of California’s adult students without talking to them or their teachers.From this “needs assessment” came a “strategic plan” entitled “Linking Adults to Opportunity, A Blueprint for the Transformation of the California Department of Adult Education Program”. Adult school students and teachers were aggressively excluded from any input on this document also. There was a “comment period” after the fully formed plan was released in October of 2010. I put “comment period” in quotes because the Adult Education Office announced, in its notice that the comment period was beginning, “Although we are beyond the point of incorporating significant revisions, we are interested in hearing any comments or concerns”. In other words, “Please do send us your concerns which we plan to do absolutely nothing about, because we have to have, you know, a comment period. It’s required or something.” Comments on the document made it abundantly clear that adult education administrators saw presentations and attended workshops on the plan while it was being formed. But students and teachers had no idea what was about to hit them until the comment period that wasn’t was launched in October of 2010.
    Since then, a series of drastic changes to California’s adult education system has rolled over teachers and students like the wheels of a juggernaut, always with no real opportunity for them to have input or explain how the process is affecting them. The LAO’s recent analysis is the next set of wheels. That doesn’t mean all the recommendations in the analysis are bad, but it does mean that, good or bad, students and teachers won’t be consulted about them. And whatever we think about the current recommendations, it’s important to remember that they flow from an untransparent and uninclusive process. The most recent LAO analysis seeks to complete, or at least further, the work that was begun in the 2009 “needs assessment”, where you will find many of the ideas in the LAO analysis mentioned.
    With that in mind, let us proceed to the recommendations
    A common ID number for community colleges and adult schools
    PROCEED WITH CAUTION: This would probably be helpful, as long as the number adopted is not the Social Security Number. Using the SSN would shut undocumented immigrants out. Given the heated nature of the debate around immigration now, any system that identifies immigrants as undocumented, such as a combination of Social Security numbers for those who have them or some other number (like an ITIN) for those who don’t, should be avoided. These numbers are eventually supposed to go into a statewide database. California has had anti-immigrant governors before (hello, Pete Wilson), and may have them again. We can’t trust that this will always be a sanctuary state. The safest option would be a common student ID # for both adult schools and community colleges that is separate from any other identifying number.
    This is actually a very old recommendation; adopting this number was one of the original mandates for the consortia. Possibly it hasn’t happened yet because the task is bigger and more complicated than policy makers realized, and the consortia are having a hard time figuring out how to do it
     Uniform funding for community colleges and adult schools
    NEED MORE INFORMATION: This is an intriguing recommendation, but it isn’t clear how it would work. The LAO notes that community colleges receive funding for their noncredit programs equivalent to $5,310 per full-time student equivalent (FTE) for most noncredit classes (it sounds like this is for the more “academic” classes, like basic math and English, ESL, and Career Tech Ed). For some noncredit courses, like parenting and citizenship, they get $3,300 per FTE.For adult schools, the state has no per-student funding rate.
    The LAO’s recommendation is strongly worded:
    We think the most important first step in any restructuring of adult education funding rules is to set a uniform rate per full-time equivalent student. That is, we recommend the state provide the same base per-student funding rate for adult schools and community colleges.
    This sounds like it could be a good thing. $5,310 per full-time student looks like a princely sum to adult schools, which almost certainly spend much less per pupil. But there are a lot of variables. Is the LAO’s intent to raise per-pupil spending for adult schools to the level of what community colleges now receive? Or is it to lower what the community colleges get and give that amount to adult schools as well? And if adult schools are to receive $5,310 FTE per student, or even some lower amount, will their total funding be raised accordingly so they can continue to serve the same number of students they now serve? Or will they have to shed students so they can spend the higher per-student amount on each student without exceeding the $375 million or so that is currently budgeted for them?
    What the LAO report doesn’t say is that adult schools did, at one time, receive per-pupil funding. Before the financial crisis of 2008 and the subsequent abolition of categorical funding for adult schools, adult schools received ADA (funding based on attendance) just like K-12 schools and community colleges. ADA for adult schools was abolished in 2008. If the state is to reinstate per-pupil funding for adult schools, it is hard to see how that could be done without restoring ADA, which would be a very good thing.
    The LAO gives a rather strange reason for being concerned about the lack of per-pupil spending for adult schools. Their concern is that, without a per-pupil rate, “adult schools determine for themselves how much to spend per student”. This might mean that “some adult schools may be offering much richer programs to a much smaller group of students.”
    Oh horrors! Richer programs! How dare they!
    This weird reasoning seems to come from the LAO’s bias towards constantly putting adult schools in the wrong. There probably is significant variation in what adult schools throughout the state spend per pupil, but the difference isn’t due to the lack of a state mandated per-pupil amount. It’s due to the fact that some adult schools have much more money than others. This was true in the best of times, and even when adult schools did receive per-pupil funding, but it was greatly exacerbated by the fiscal crisis of 2008 and the state’s consequent decision to abolish categorical funding for adult schools. The fate of adult schools then tended to depend on how well their K-12 district was doing. Some districts took all the adult school money and abolished their adult schools. Others kept their adult schools open, but just barely. Oakland is a good example of this; a system which had served 25,000 adults annually was reduced to 11 classes. But some adult schools, usually ones in better funded districts, survived nearly unscathed.
    Once the financial crisis was over, the state did nothing to rectify this situation, but instead locked it in. Through the Adult Education Block Grant, adult schools receive the same amount of money they received in 2013, which was the year the state put an end to the freefall that began in 2008, when the state began to allow school districts to take as much money from their adult schools as they wanted. Nothing was done to restore adult schools that had been ravaged, like Oakland. Adult schools that had been cut to the bone had to start functioning in the new AEBG consortium system alongside adult schools that had maintained most of their funding and community colleges that were having their funding increased. The LAO keeps saying that some consortia are functioning better than others, but they never look at what individual adult schools within the consortia are up against, which might explain a lot of the discrepancy they so love to bemoan.
    The fear that a few adult schools might be offering rich programs to a pampered few students (unlikely) isn’t a very good reason to suggest that their per pupil funding be put on equal footing with that of the community college non-credit programs. A much better reason is that adult schools are being asked to participate in the consortia with community colleges as equals, but their funding is wildly unequal. If the state would adopt a per-pupil spending rate for adult schools that is equal to what community college non-credit programs receive now, and fund adult schools so that, at the new per-pupil rate, they could continue serving the same number of students they serve now, that would be wonderful, and a very significant step towards repairing the damage that began in 2008. But it would probably entail putting much more money into the adult education budget than is currently proposed.
    Elimination of course fees or adoption of a uniform “nominal” fee
    Elimination YES, BUT; “nominal” fee NO:
    Elimination of fees refers only to Career Technical Education (CTE) classes, because all other state funded adult school programs (Adult Basic Education, High School Diploma, GED. Adults with Disabilities, English as a Second Language, and some Parent Education) are currently mandated to be offered free. There is state funding for CTE, and the fact that adult schools can still charge for it is an anomaly. However, CTE classes are more expensive to run, and adult schools might not be able to offer them at all if they couldn’t charge for them. The LAO notes that if adult school per pupil funding is put on an equal footing with that of community college non-credit programs, then most adult schools could probably operate their CTE programs without charging fees. In which case, full speed ahead; let’s get rid of the fees.
    But the LAO also puts forward another possibility, that both community colleges and adult schools start charging a “nominal” fee for all courses, including the ones that are now offered free. This is a truly bad idea, in so many ways.
    Last year, Governor Brown signed a law that could make the first year of community college free to students regardless of financial need. https://edsource.org/2017/free-first-year-of-community-college-amid-flurry-of-education-related-bills-signed-by-governor/588795
    The City of San Francisco is providing funding so that a college education at City College of San Francisco can be completely free. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/08/san-francisco-to-be-the-first-us-city-to-offer-free-college.html
    Why, at this time when we as a state are starting not only to recognize the value of free education, but finding ways to make it happen, are we even considering soaking people who need to acquire basic literacy skills? Look again at the kinds of classes that are being offered free: Adult Basic Education, the equivalent of an elementary school education for adults, High School Diploma and GED, for adults who don’t have a high school education, ESL for immigrants who haven’t mastered English, Adults with Disabilities, for adults who may have limited employment options or even need help with skills for everyday living due to a disability. These are classes for people who may not read well (at least in English, for ESL students), or may not be able to read at all. They usually cannot write much (at least in English). They may lack basic math skills. They often work, but often in jobs that don’t make them much money because their lack of literacy limits their access to higher paying jobs. Why do we want to start charging them for the classes they need to get ahead and be able to better support their families?
    The LAO offers a reason that is as insulting to these hard-working and sometimes struggling students as it is ill-informed:
    Requiring all students to pay a small fee could foster positive behavioral changes – such as making students more deliberate in their selection of courses and more purposeful about holding campuses accountable for high-quality services. That is, rather than being a barrier, the fee would be intended to ensure students are serious about their studies and campuses are serious about offering quality programs aligned with student interests.
    What evidence does the LAO have that students aren’t serious about their studies now, or that schools aren’t serious about offering quality programs? They don’t give any. It is just assumed that students aren’t taking their studies seriously because the classes are free.
    Why would the LAO make such an assumption about our students with no evidence? Unfortunately, they may be unconsciously tapping into an unexamined and harmful assumption our culture makes about poor people: that they are lazy and make bad decisions, and that’s why they are poor. Why charging them a few bucks would cure all these supposed faults is not clear, but it seems to be the preferred remedy.
    The truth is that if our students were lazy, they wouldn’t even be in school. Unlike children, they aren’t being forced to come. The idea that they might be choosing the wrong courses is just bizarre. If you look again at the programs that are free, there is little possibility that students are going to make a mistake about which one to enter. An immigrant who needs to learn English isn’t going to sign up for an Adults with Disabilities class by mistake. And if there are situations where students are choosing the wrong class, it’s probably because the school doesn’t have adequate counselling services, not because the students aren’t paying for the classes.
    Which brings us to the idea that students will hold their schools more accountable for quality programs if they are paying. This is just weird. If a school’s programs aren’t all they should be, lack of funding is more likely to be the problem than lack of student complaint. And if the funding isn’t there, the students can complain until the cows come home without the school being able to do much about the problems. I would like to assure the LAO that, although our students are certainly grateful for the free classes we offer, their gratitude doesn’t keep them from complaining or making suggestions when appropriate. Charging them money isn’t likely to significantly change their behavior in this regard.
    The LAO has imagined a problem that isn’t there, and then proposed to solve it with “nominal” fees. If the fees are truly “nominal”, they won’t contribute much to the budgets of adult schools or community colleges; they won’t for example, allow adult schools to keep running CTE classes without substantially more state funding. And, according to the LAO, the purpose of the fees isn’t to contribute to school funding anyway; the fees are there to discourage “bad” student behavior that doesn’t even exist.
    And the fact is that the fees will be a barrier for some. However “nominal” the fee, there will be students who are unable to pay. Families with limited resources tend to do triage as to which family members get an education when they have to pay; this can mean that they decide to educate men instead of women because men still make more than women. And students who have to frequently stop out of school because of family or work responsibilities may give up if they have to spend $25 or $35 a term to sign up for classes they may not be able to attend.
    What relatively small fees can do is discourage the students who are harder to serve. This makes the job of the school easier, because they are now serving the students with more resources and lives that are less disrupted. But is the purpose of education policy to make the job of the school easier, or is it to educate all students, even the ones with the most challenges?
    The fact is that, rather than encouraging “good” behavior in students, fees can encourage bad behavior in institutions. Schools can rely on fees to push out the harder to serve students, rather than finding solutions that will help those students stay in school. Another problem with “nominal” fees is that they don’t stay nominal. Once the fees are there, raising them can become the preferred solution to every need or even desire for funding. One need only to look at the rising tuition and obscenely climbing pay for administrators at U.C. Berkeley to see where this can lead, or at our country’s staggering problem with student debt.
    Free adult education in California began in the mid-nineteenth century. Somehow the state was able to see the value of free education that served primarily low income people and immigrants even in an era that wasn’t very sympathetic to immigrants and the poor. Adult education in California remained free even during the Great Depression of the 1930s. Our state currently enjoys a booming economy and a healthy surplus, and hopefully has a more enlightened attitude about immigration and poverty than it had in the 1800s. Why would we start charging for adult education classes now? Instead, we need to commit to the concept of public education as a public good. If we can recognize this by beginning to provide the first year of community college free, certainly we can do it by keeping state funded adult education classes free.
    Entities other than adult schools and community colleges to participate in the consortia
    NEED MORE INFORMATION: This would seem like a “yes”, but how would these entities be affected? It seems like we should hear from them. When the consortia were getting up and running, other state and federally funded providers of adult education, like library literacy programs, were encouraged, but not required, to participate, and some certainly did. In some consortia they may not have felt entirely welcome, because the designated recipients of the AEBG funding, community colleges and adult schools, may have feared that they wanted a nibble at the AEBG money. This may explain why, in some cases at least, they may not be participating any more. Now the LAO is recommending that they be required to participate in order to receive their state funding, but not that they get any additional funding. It seems that if their participation in the consortia will impose any additional costs on them, they should get some additional funding through the consortia or some other source
    A portion of funding based on performance
    NO: The state keeps piling more and more data and reporting requirements onto the consortia, with the result that too much funding is going to data and reporting and not enough to direct services for students. We have seen huge increases in resources going to data and reporting in the form of positions for consortium managers and accountants, additional meetings for administrators and teachers, and staff tied up in running data and writing reports. There has been very little in the way of new services for students or new classes. Students at the lower levels are being particularly shortchanged, as the workforce focus of the AEBG puts pressure on the consortia to show transitions to higher education and the workforce. Adding a performance based component to funding would only exacerbate these unfortunate trends.
    It is also unfair to implement performance based funding when inequalities between adult schools created by categorical flexibility have not been addressed. The playing field is nowhere near level, and those schools and consortia that are already in a better financial position will be better equipped to deal with a performance based funding component. The state needs to help struggling adult schools and consortia by providing equitable funding, instead of punishing struggling schools by tying funding to “performance”, which is often another way of saying that a school already has the resources it needs to do well
    .Performance based funding and punishing schools for not meeting benchmarks are part of the failed No Child Left Behind/Race to the Top federal policies. Haven’t we learned yet that this only locks in or even worsens inequalities instead of correcting them?
    In case the LAO and state legislators are unaware of this, most adult schools already spend an enormous amount of time and energy pursuing performance-based federal WIOA funding tied to data collection and scores on CASAS reading tests. The pursuit of improved CASAS reading scores distorts adult school programs because skills that are important to students but not measured by the standardized test, like speaking, pronunciation, grammar and writing (for ESL students) are sometimes squeezed out by the need to show progress on the reading test. We have enough performance-based already, thank you.
    Alignment of assessment and placement policies among community colleges and adult schools
    YES: The LAO report notes that “segments” are working on these alignments and recommends that the issue be revisited in 2019-2020, when the work should be complete. Although being called a “segment” makes me feel like I’m somehow part of a worm, the work of aligning assessments and placement is important and this recommendation by the LAO makes sense.
    Abolishing the adult school teaching credential
    NO: This one has adult school teachers really worried. After a decade of dismissive treatment by the state, we have to wonder..
    Read Full Article
    Visit website
    • Show original
    • .
    • Share
    • .
    • Favorite
    • .
    • Email
    • .
    • Add Tags 
    Immigrant integration! What do you know about it?

    How do you talk about it? Where and how is it discussed in your consortium? Is it integrated into your consortium's plans for the future?

    Are you including immigrant voices in your discussion of and planning for? Are you including adult learner voices in your discussion of and planning for?

    These are pivotal questions as we continue to shape and refine the new form that Adult Education is taking post catastrophic cuts and closures and into the narrowed mission, workforce-focused Regional Consortia system. 

    Is the new form okay?  Does it need tweaking?  Now - in budget season and while there is money to spend - is the time to look at what we have and where it can be improved to better serve the people of California.

    Thank you to Bob Harper and Usha Narayanan - who presented on this topic at the CCAE Bay Conference on Saturday, March 3rd in the "ALLIES and the Immigrant Integration Framework" workshop.

    To better understand the idea of immigrant integration, why it's valuable, and how it can become a powerful and empowering part of our work as consortia, check out this excellent slideshow created by Bob Harper, Ilse Pollet and Pat Rickard.

    Click on this link to see the slideshow: http://www.caeaa.org/conf2018/conf4.pdf  

    (Or scroll through the small but better than nothing screen shots of the slide show (below) - screenshot because the slide show is a pdf and jpg's are what are needed for images on Blogger.)

    Important Note: 
    Incorporating immigrant integration metrics into the Adult Ed Block Grant is one of CCAE's asks of the Legislature and Governor Brown in this budget season. Learn more about CCAE's legislative and advocacy work here: https://www.ccaestate.org/legislative-news

    Read Full Article
    Visit website
    • Show original
    • .
    • Share
    • .
    • Favorite
    • .
    • Email
    • .
    • Add Tags 
    Educators, please take this survey created by the BATs’ Quality of Life Team about Gun Violence in our schools. -   https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/8LCGWDC 

    Read Full Article
    Visit website
    • Show original
    • .
    • Share
    • .
    • Favorite
    • .
    • Email
    • .
    • Add Tags 
    Recently the LAO recommended that K12 Adult Education - Adult Schools - no longer require a teaching credential.

    Here's what they said:

    "No Longer Require Adult School Instructors to Hold a Credential.
    We recommend the Legislature amend statute so that individuals no longer need a teaching credential to serve as instructors at adult schools. By aligning qualifications for instructors, instructors could readily teach adult education courses at both community colleges and adult schools. Moreover, the change could help adult schools in hiring teachers. If the state has concerns about the quality of adult education instructors, it could encourage consortia to provide professional development as needed." - From the 2018 LAO Report on Adult Education http://lao.ca.gov/…/2018-19-Adult-Education-Analysis-021518…

    Adult School Credential - Require or Don't Require - Major Policy Change

    If we are going to make a major policy change and no longer require a teaching credential for Adult School teachers, we need to have informed and meaningful conversations about credentials - what are they, how do you get one, what do they signify, how good are or aren't the programs that give them, what is their purpose, etc.

    Here is some information to gets us started on that conversation.

    State of California Commission on Teacher Credentialing Information

    The official name for an Adult Ed credential is a Designated Subjects credential.

    Here's the California CTC - Commission on Teacher Credentialing - webpage with the requirements for a Designated Subjects teaching credential.

    Two Levels of Credential

    There are two levels of credentials for teaching Adult Ed - preliminary and clear.  Preliminary gets you in the door so you can start teaching.  Clear says you have met all the initial requirements plus more requirements plus you have experience.  Now you are "clear" to teach as a solid, seasoned professional.  The credential must be renewed every five years.  This screens out issues which may come up which would bar a person from teaching.

    From the website:  Period of Validity The preliminary credential is valid for three years. The clear credential is valid for five years and must be renewed online every five-year renewal cycle. Once issued, there are no additional academic requirements to renew the clear credential.

    Introductory information on the CTC webpage

    The Preliminary or Clear Designated Subjects Adult Education Teaching Credential authorizes the holder to teach the subjects named on the credential in courses organized primarily for adults. In addition, the holder may serve as a substitute in courses organized primarily for adults for not more than 30 days for any one teacher during the school year. Designated Subjects Adult Education Teaching Credentials are issued to individuals who meet the requirements listed below and are recommended by a Commission-approved program sponsor.

    Requirements for the Preliminary Credential 

    1. Three years of experience and/or education directly related to each subject to be named on the credential. (see Terms and Definitions for information regarding the experience requirement for general subjects or the section ACADEMIC SUBJECTS THAT MAY BE LISTED ON A CREDENTIAL for information regarding the education requirement for academic subjects)

    2. High school diploma requirement by one of the following methods: a. High school diploma b. Diploma based on passage of the GED Test c. Foreign equivalent of a high school diploma

    3. Satisfy the basic skills requirement. See Commission program leaflet CL-667, entitled Basic Skills Requirement for additional information. Applicants for the Adult Credential in general subjects (see chart later in this leaflet) are exempt from the basic skills requirement.

    4. Verification, signed by the Commission-approved program sponsor, that the applicant has been apprised of the requirements for both the preliminary and clear credentials, including the requirements of the program of personalized preparation

    5. Completed application (form 41-4)

    6. Completed Live Scan receipt (41-LS), verifying fingerprints have been taken and fees have been paid, unless fingerprint clearance is already on file at the Commission

    7. Application processing fee

    8. Recommendation by a Commission-approved program sponsor

    Requirements for the Clear Credential

    Individuals must satisfy all of the following requirements:

    1.  Possess a valid California Preliminary Designated Subjects Adult Education Teaching Credential (three year or five-year)

    2.  Commission-approved program of personalized preparation 

    3.  Two years of successful teaching on the basis of the Preliminary Designated Subjects Adult Education Teaching Credential in the subject(s) listed on the credential. This is defined as teaching of a minimum of one course in each of four terms within the three-year period of validity of the preliminary adult education teaching credential

    4. U.S. Constitution requirement by one of the following methods: a. Complete a course (at least two semester units or three quarter units) in the provisions and principles of the U.S. Constitution. Submit a photocopy of the course description for evaluation purposes. b.   Pass an examination in the provisions and principles of the U.S. Constitution given by a regionally accredited college or university

    5. Health education, including, but not limited to, the study of nutrition; the physiological and sociological effects of abuse of alcohol, narcotics, and drugs, and the use of tobacco. This requirement must also include training in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) that covers infant, child, and adult CPR skills.

    6. Computer-based technology, including the uses of technology in educational settings

    7. Completed application (form 41-4)

    8. Application processing fee 

    9.  Recommendation by a Commission-approved program sponsor

    NOTE:  Adult Ed covers a broad array of subjects and requirements for these teaching these subjects vary.

    Requirements for Teaching ESL

    English as a Second Language is one of the biggest programs in Adult Education.  Let's take a look at those requirements.

    A bachelor’s degree or higher completed at a regionally-accredited college or university to include a degree major, certificate, or completion of 20 semester units or 10 upper division semester units in one or any combination of the following: Teaching English as a Second Language (TESL) Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) Second Language Acquisition Language other than English Linguistics Bilingual/Bicultural studies.

    Credential Programs

    Credential programs vary - some are excellent and some not so good.

    San Francisco State University

    I got my credential at San Francisco State University.  It was an excellent program. During the years of cuts and closures, SFSU stopped offering the credential program.  Not surprising - Adult Ed barely survived that program.  Over 70 Adult Schools closed and all were cut.  There were virtually no jobs available in Adult Ed.

    SFSU offers a Masters in Education with a Concentration in Adult Education - which looks excellent.  Dr. Doris Flowers is one of the Graduate Advisors and I can attest to her excellence in both teaching and depth of knowledge in the field.  I studied with her at SFSU.  

    (Blog author writing this ---  who studied at SFSU --- Cynthia Eagleton)

    No More Adult Ed Credential at SFSU So Let's Look at LA

    But no more designated subjects credential at SFSU so let's look at Los Angeles - a region in huge need of Adult Ed and home of the biggest Adult School in the state.  Here is the coursework offered by the Los Angeles County Office of Education for a Designated Subjects Credential. 

    On-Line versus In-Person Credential Programs

    NOTE:  The coursework offered by LACOE appears to be somewhat similar in content to what I took at SFSU - but the courses are offered online in a partnership with the University of San Diego.  Having both taken and taught both online and in-person classes, I am of the opinion that when it comes to learning how to teach, at least some of the coursework should in-person.  Part of learning how to be a good teacher is being a student in a class about good teaching taught by a skillful teacher, talking about what works and what doesn't with real people in real time.  There's no substitute for it.   (Opinion mine - Cynthia Eagleton)

    The LACOE Designated Subjects Adult Education (AE) Credential Program includes the following:

    Early Orientation Modules 1-6 and Professional Development Modules 7 & 10 (complete within thirty days) Candidates begin the program by completing the free, self-paced, online Early Orientation training modules  1-6 as well as the free Professional Development modules 7 & 10. Applicants must complete the eight modules within thirty (30) days of receiving the email instructions from the DS Credentials Coordinator.

    Required Coursework (after completion of the EO/PD modules):

    Foundations of Classroom Management, 3 semester units ($600) 
    Foundations of Curriculum, 3 semester units ($600) 
    Foundations for Teaching Adult Learners, 3 semester units ($600) 
    Teaching Portfolio, 2 semester units ($350) 
    Health Education for Teachers, 2 semester units ($350)
    Total Program Units and Fees: 11 semester units (Total $2425)*

    LACOE provides the credentials coursework in partnership with the University of San Diego (USD). Courses are offered online. Course sequence and descriptions are as follows: 

    FIRST COURSE: Foundations of Classroom Management Candidates will continue to build on effective instructional strategies learned in the EO/PD modules for getting started in the classroom.  The course will focus on developing classroom management strategies to achieve positive learning outcomes and address safety issues to ensure an effective learning environment. Other topics include an overview of CTE, lesson mastery, and education resources. Candidates will review the program requirements for the clear credential and learn strategies for obtaining teaching positions. 

    SECOND COURSE: Foundations of Curriculum Candidates will explore key websites for curriculum planning and development of course outlines, syllabi, and lesson plans using the K-12 Content Standards and the CTE Standards.  Development and use of student assessments tied to standards-based instruction will be studied. Candidates will focus on the effective use of technology to support and enhance classroom instruction. 

    THIRD COURSE: Foundations for Teaching Adult Learners This course provides candidates with an understanding of how to become an effective teacher of adults. Building upon the Adult Learning Theory module completed in the Early Orientation, candidates will study the andragogy and principles of teaching adults along with key concepts that inform teaching practices. Strategies for teaching to a diverse group of adult learners will be provided including differentiated instruction techniques. 

    FOURTH COURSE: Teaching Portfolio This culminating course will enable candidates to provide evidence through an e-portfolio of their knowledge and skills as an effective CTE teacher. 

    FIFTH COURSE:  Health Education for Teachers This course provides information on legal mandates for teachers and strategies for promoting healthy choices for students. The course may be taken concurrently with any other courses. 

    *Subject to change. Please go to www.lacoe.edu and then Credential Program for course schedules and fees.

    Keep - Change - Throw Away

    So that's some basic info - very basic info - about Adult Ed credentials.

    There is much more to discuss:   The value of credentials.  What they signify.  How credentialing programs could or should be improved.  The reality of jobs - plentiful, scarce, good, bad - teaching in Adult Ed in California - in Adult Schools or at Community Colleges.  And much, much more.

    What are you thoughts?  Keep, change or throw away the credential and/or these programs?

    Please weigh in through the comment box or by writing a guest post for the blog.  If you are interested in writing a guest post, please contact me, Cynthia.

    Read Full Article
    Visit website
    • Show original
    • .
    • Share
    • .
    • Favorite
    • .
    • Email
    • .
    • Add Tags 

    The LAO - the Legislative Analyst Office - recently came out with a Report on Adult Education.  The report was posted on Adult Education Matters Facebook page.  Several readers responded.  With permission, here is Jean MacDonald's response (below the pertinent recommendations from the LAO Report.).

    The LAO Report's Recommendations on Credentialing
    "No Longer Require Adult School Instructors to Hold a Credential.
    We recommend the Legislature amend statute so that individuals no longer need a teaching credential to serve as instructors at adult schools. By aligning qualifications for instructors, instructors could readily teach adult education courses at both community colleges and adult schools. Moreover, the change could help adult schools in hiring teachers. If the state has concerns about the quality of adult education instructors, it could encourage consortia to provide professional development as needed." - From the 2018 LAO Report on Adult Education http://lao.ca.gov/…/2018-19-Adult-Education-Analysis-021518…

    "Adult Education Instructors Held to Different Qualification Requirements.
    Despite teaching similar content, instructors from community colleges and adult schools are subject to different minimum qualifications for employment. Whereas both community colleges and adult schools generally require instructors to have a bachelor’s degree or higher, statute places higher requirements on adult school instructors. Specifically, adult school instructors also must have a state-approved teaching credential. This inconsistency results in instructors who can teach at one segment but not the other. It also can make hiring instructors at adult schools more difficult than at community colleges."
    From the 2018 LAO Report on Adult Education

    Jean MacDonald responds:

    This letter is in response to the latest attack on adult ed and its credentials, and the LAO proposals.

    To my knowledge, in order to acquire a preliminary adult ed credential, the CTC.org demands: paperwork, a CBEST, NO bachelor's degree and enrollment in a State-approved program. UC Berkeley is on the list for example. Its program is 10 units total. Eight units are online, one is an orientation, and the other is student-teaching on-the-job. The whole program is 10 hours (One unit is 1 hour of coursework). This can be done in optional 3-5 years while teaching. Yes indeed, ten hours must be done within 3 to 5 years. Apparently, the report states this too burdensome. I disagree. ESL does require a BA. though.

    Also, the report claims it is easier to get a job in a community college. Conversely, in my experience, if you want to work at Los Medanos, Diablo Valley, Las Positas.or Solano Community Colleges in ESL, you must have a minimum of a Master's in Applied Linguistics, TESOL, or the equivalent for part-time, and a PhD or equivalent for full-time tenure track.This is hardly easier than the adult ed credential requirements above. These two degrees are very time- and effort-consuming (expensive too) as opposed to NO degree required by the CTC for the adult ed credential. I think this should be looked at again. It is simply not factual.

    Moreover, most teaching jobs in adult ed, although capped at around 19.5 hours, are more "stable", even as part time because they reoccur. Whereas, at a community college, the classes differ from one semester to the next. You find yourself more at-will. The report says the opposite.

    Personally, I worked as an adjunct 4 years at Los Medanos College teaching different courses, classes, hours and was never called back again since. I have an MA in Ed, and have worked at my current positions in adult schools, part-time only, for 16+ years. I'm maxed out on the salary scale, at-will, no benefits, denied other open positions- dead-end/frustrated. I am told I won't be hired full-time for budget reasons. I want it known now so the situation can be improved.

    From working in 4 different adult schools, I know they cap 90 % of their teachers, arbitrarily, at around 19.5 hours or so, regardless of the need, to save districts money (This info is easy to find in WASC reports). They claim they have none in the budget (not according to public websites). I have been told this for years. Dstricts have millions in reserves. So why are we still being short-changed a living-wage? The report does not address this. The sweat is on our backs as we do all the teaching.

    Consequently, teacher-strapped administrators may then ask the same part-timers to refer friends to teach. They may leave flyers out daily for the incoming public to advertise the need for part-time teachers. Maybe the students know people. We would like more hours, but tough luck. Instead, classes are cancelled or doubled-up daily, no teacher or sub. signs on the door. We have to then run to 2 or 3 other districts, often the same day, part-time in each, no benefits anywhere- even though the money comes from the same originating sources, the AEBG, WIOA, the CDOE. And there seems to be plenty of it for everyone but us teachers: Secretaries, janitors, principals, non-teaching staff, TOSA's, consultants, even Board members may have comprehensive contracts and benefit packages. Adult Ed unfairly-made-to-be part-timers get none of it. We get all the hard work.

    Morover, the adult ed teaching shortage is further aggravated when HRs don't advertise properly on EdJoin. They don't describe the working hours, or give adequate job descriptions (avoiding the facts- unpaid prep, extra unpaid administrative duties, no CA ED Code protections, at-will, etc.)The ads just say, "continued posting, ongoing opening, pool, no medical benefits, hourly, some mornings, hours vary." Who wants to apply for that uncertainty? Many don't. Many are not advertised at all. There are instances of backdoor-hiring. Since full-time jobs are so scarce, inside buddy-hiring has existed, which might not result in the best teachers for students. Actual result, you are left hopeless and look to leave the field. It happened to me. The proposed bill does not say anything to stop this.

    As for letting the consortia handle professional development, that would be disastrous. A principal may cut your already-bargained-for PD Day to half for speaking up and being assertive in your union. The same principal may also be a consortium director-voter with other non-union adult ed school principals. Most adult schools do not enlist us in their unions- complaints about it ignored (another matter). The same consortia are headed by these types of principals from local adult ed schools.They may act like dictators fighting teachers tooth and nail at the bargaining table; They then have voting power of the AEBG and WIOA funding. Don't let the consortia be in charge of PD, please. Principals have wielded too much power against us.

    Upper- mangement fights us too. An excuse I have heard is, "You want to work part-time. That is why we chose adult ed." It is like that all over the state." A "Wall of Shame." now exists for adult ed made-to-be part-timers. The same managers may make $160,000- $240,000+ minimums in salaries and benefits (Transparent CA.org). The LAO may want to examine such stratifications in public personnel pay and benefits. I think it needs to be considered before any policy change is made. Otherwise, I fear the grant money will be wasted on lining executives' pockets. Their salaries and pensions are huger and huger public expenditures (Transparent CA.org). We are broke, on food stamps, MediCal, homeless, etc. Various news articles have reported adjunct teachers' hardships. We must consider changing this.

    There are many more pertinent and valid reasons why teachers have fled adult ed. They are not because of credentialing requirements. Eliminating credentials will dismantle, gut and further destroy quality teaching for good. Legal swindle complete. Sorry students. You don't matter because your teacher doesn't. Teaching-quality so obviously ill-considered, walk away, drop out, stay unskilled, be unemployed, don't speak English, go to prison, get public assistance. On the upside, principals, vice principals, superintendents, assistant superintendents and their school budgets will be richer.

    Top-down systems need to change to more democratic ones. We the made-to-be-part-time adult ed teachers are more important. Spend the money on us. Change the Bill to prevent the above issues from continuing to happen to us and the students.

    In all certainty, keep the measely 10-hour requirement, CBEST, fingerprinting-minimal professionalism of the field. Use at least some of the available money to make full-time adult ed instructors' jobs attractive to qualified people with the highest qualifications possible. We are completely left out all around. Teachers in adult ed have put the time in, got degrees, have student loans, families to support, bills to pay, like janitors, secretaries, principals, etc. They can't do it on a part-time basis. Sharing is caring. We care. Won't you?

    I hope to see you on April 9 in Sacramento. I will be telling my story to legislators on committees.

    Jean MacDonald, thank you for sharing your knowledge, wisdom and invitation to action. 

    AEM welcomes Perspective pieces.  If you would like to share yours, contact Cynthia.

    For more information about the April 9th rally hosted by CCAE, go here.

    Adult Education RallyMonday, April 9, 2018
    1:00 p.m.-3:00 p.m.
    Capitol Building, West Side
    Sacramento, California

    Students are welcome to join.

    Read Full Article
    Visit website

    Read for later

    Articles marked as Favorite are saved for later viewing.
    • Show original
    • .
    • Share
    • .
    • Favorite
    • .
    • Email
    • .
    • Add Tags 

    Separate tags by commas
    To access this feature, please upgrade your account.
    Start your free month
    Free Preview