Skip to main content
California Department of Education Logo

ELA ELD SMC Meeting Minutes for March 7, 2014

State of California
Edmund G. Brown Jr., Governor

Instructional Quality Commission
An advisory body to the California State Board of Education

FINAL MEETING MINUTES: March 7, 2014

English Language Arts/English Language Development Subject Matter Committee Meeting

(Approved on March 28, 2014)


Report of Action

Friday, March 7, 2014
9 a.m. to 3:50 p.m.

English Language Arts/English Language Development (ELA/ELD) Subject Matter Committee (SMC) Members Present:
  • Jo Ann Isken, Chair
  • Carla Herrera, Vice Chair
  • Kristyn Bennett
  • Jose Dorado
  • Marlene Galvan
  • Carlos Ulloa
Instructional Quality Commission (IQC) Members Present:
  • Bill Honig, IQC Chair
  • Edward D’Souza
  • Robert Foster
  • Lori Freiermuth
  • Nancy McTygue
  • Brian Muller
Executive Director
  • Thomas Adams
State Board of Education Liaison Present:
  • Ilene Straus
English Language Arts/English Language Development Subject Matter Committee
  • SMC Chair Isken called the English Language Arts/English Language Development (ELA/ELD) SMC meeting to order. All participating ELA/ELD SMC members, IQC members, CDE staff, and members of the public introduced themselves.
  • Draft English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework (Information/Action)

Staff explained the different documents sent in preparation for the meeting: Item A provided a general update by the writers on the chapters and proposed revisions; Item B was a chart of various revisions and edits that would be used as the guiding document for discussion; Item C was the compilation of the survey results data and comments; Item D included an index of all 67 comments sent via the ELAFRAMEWORK mailbox from individuals, county offices of education, and other organizations; and Item E was a list of recommended revisions by CDE divisions.

  • Discussion of Field Results (Information): Chair Isken reviewed the overall responses from survey results as noted in Item C. She highlighted that although the data indicated overall the responses were about even for those who rated the framework “excellent” or “good” (34) compared to those that rated it “fair” or “poor” (36), many of those who responded negatively were focused on the adoption of the standards and policies that were beyond the scope of the framework. In comments that related specifically to the framework content, and in presentations held throughout the state, the response from the field for the framework has been overwhelmingly positive. The majority of the suggested revisions and edits focused on how to improve this ground-breaking document.
  • Revise and Edit the Draft ELA/ELD Framework (Information/Action): The members reviewed the guiding principles and process for reviewing the large number of suggested revisions and edits. The principles for review confirmed that the changes be consistent with the SBE-approved guidelines, provide clarification, add value to the chapters, be supported by research, eliminate redundancies, and create clear and concise narrative. The intention was not to add new content but clarify draft language. Chair Isken noted that since the framework is a dynamic document it will be possible to add new instructional practices, update content as it is revised, or develop new snapshots or vignettes as more examples are developed over the life of the framework.

Using the chart of various revisions and edits in Item B as the guide, the discussion for the revisions followed the following order: 1) the writers highlighted their suggestions for improvements following the outline on Item A; 2) Next, the writers provided input for each general comment, or comments for each chapter, along with staff members, offering support, any concerns, or questions for clarification; 3) Commissioners were asked for any additional comments or suggestions revisions; and 4) members of the public were then asked for additional input or edits. At the end of each general comment or list of comments by chapters, the chair asked for consensus on the suggested revisions or edits. The edits shaded in grey on the Item B chart and identified as “edit” were not discussed unless requested.

A summary for each general comment or series of chapter items, plus any additional suggested revisions that evolved from the committee’s discussions, are included in Attachment XX to the ELA/ELD SMC agenda item.

ACTION:

Commissioner Bennett moved  to approve noted recommendations on the Item B “Chart of Revisions and Edits – Action/Discussion” for editing the framework; direct the writers and staff to incorporate the approved recommendations and edits; and to bring a summary of today’s action to the IQC meeting on March 28, including a new draft of Chapter 7. Commissioner Galvan seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously by the ELA/ELD SMC members present.

Last Reviewed: Thursday, October 20, 2016
Trending in Commissions & Committees
Recently Posted in Commissions & Committees
  • March 27, 2017 H-SS SMC Minutes (added 23-May-2017)
    FInal minutes of the March 27, 2017 History-Social Science Subject Matter Meeting.
  • April 24, 2017 H-SS Meeting Minutes (added 23-May-2017)
    History-Social Science Subjet Matter Committee Meeting Mintues of April 24, 2017.
  • CPAG Meeting Notice and Agenda, June 2017 (added 22-May-2017)
    California Practitioners Advisory Group (CPAG) Public meeting notice and agenda for its June 1, 2017 meeting.
  • April 2017 CPAG Item 03 Slides (PDF) (added 13-Apr-2017)
    Item 03 Presentation on California and the Every Student Succeeds Act for the California Practitioners Advisory Group April 2017 Meeting.
  • April 2017 Agenda Item 01 Slides (PDF) (added 12-Apr-2017)
    Item 01 presentation update on the rollout of the California School Dashboard, including, but not limited to: Next Steps for the Dashboard, and Using the Dashboard to Support the Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) Pr

  • Apil 2017 Agenda Item 02 Handout 1 (DOC) (added 12-Apr-2017)
    Combining ELA and Math Indicators for the Lowest 5 Percent.
  • April 2017 Agenda Item 02 Slides (PDF) (added 12-Apr-2017)
    Item 02 presentation on the feedback on options for the methodology to identify not less than the lowest-performing five percent of all schools receiving Title I, Part A funds in the state for comprehensive support And imp
  • April 2017 Agenda Item 04 Slides (PDF) (added 12-Apr-2017)
    Item 04 presentation update and feedback on the English Learner Progress Indicator Workgroup; and update on the School Conditions and Climate Work Group, the Ad Hoc Family Engagement Work Group, and the Statements of Model
  • April 2017 Memorandum CPAG Item 03 (DOC) (added 12-Apr-2017)
    Feedback Regarding the Local Control and Accountability Plan Addendum to Meet Local Educational Agency Planning Requirements of the Every Student Succeeds Act.
  • April 2017 Memorandum CPAG Item 04 (DOC) (added 12-Apr-2017)
    Update on the School Conditions and Climate Work Group, the Ad Hoc Family Engagement Work Group, and The Development of The Statements of Model Practices.