• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

California Department of Education SBE-003 (REV 4/17/07) cib-pdd-sep07item02 ITEM # 37 CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION

SEPTEMBER 2007 AGENDA

SUBJECT Action Mathematics and Reading Professional Development Program, Senate Bill 472, (Chapter 524, Statutes of 2006): Adopt Proposed Information Title 5 Regulations Public Hearing

1RECOMMENDATION 2 3The California Department of Education (CDE) recommends that the State Board of 4Education (SBE) take the following action: 5 6  Approve the Final Statement of Reasons;

7 8  Adopt the proposed regulations; and

9 10  Direct the CDE to submit the rulemaking file to the Office of Administrative Law for 11 approval.

12 13 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DISCUSSION AND ACTION 1514On January 10, 2007, the SBE approved the commencement of the rulemaking process for 16the proposed emergency regulations to the Mathematics and Reading Professional 17Development (MRPD) program and directed staff to begin the 45-day written comment 18period. On January 29, 2007, the emergency regulations were withdrawn because they did 19not meet the criteria of emergency according to the Office of Administrative Law. On 20January 20, 2007, the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was posted. The 45-day public 21comment period ended on March 16, 2007. 22 23At the May 2007 SBE meeting, the SBE approved amendments to the regulations and 24directed that the proposed amendments be circulated for a 15-day comment period. The 25public comment period began on May 9, 2007, and ended on May 25, 2007. 26 27The CDE and SBE staff relied upon the English Learner Professional Development (ELPD) 28Advisory Committee’s recommendations during the writing of the proposed amendments. As 29such, on June 6, 2007, a public notice regarding the recommendations of the Advisory 30Committee titled, Notice of Documents Relied Upon in Amending the Regulations, was 31posted. The 15-Day public comment period began on June 7, 2007, and ended on June 21, 322007. 33 34At the July 2007 SBE meeting, the SBE approved amendments to the regulations and 35directed that the proposed amendments be circulated for an additional 15-day comment 36period. The public comment period began on July 13, 2007, and ended on July 27, 2007.

1 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 2 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Page 2 of 2 1 SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES

2 3The MRPD program regulations serve to guide local educational agencies and training 4providers in the implementation of the professional development program. Regulations are 5included for the 40-hour initial training and the 40-hour ELPD program. The regulations clarify 6the following: (1) funding allocation for teachers of English learners; (2) training curriculum for 7the initial training and the ELPD; (3) curriculum review of initial training and the ELPD; (4) 8quality standards for training providers of the initial training and the ELPD; (5) funding related 9to the 80 hours of follow-up professional development, including ELPD; and (6) the review 10process for training curriculum and training providers related to the initial training and the 11ELPD. 12 FISCAL ANALYSIS (AS APPROPRIATE)

13 14The fiscal analysis was submitted at the May 2007 SBE meeting. 15 ATTACHMENT(S)

16 17Attachment 1: Final Statement of Reasons (50 pages) 18 19Attachment 2: Title 5. EDUCATION 20 Division 1. California Department of Education 21 Chapter 11. Special Programs 22 Subchapter 21. Mathematics and Reading Professional Development Program 23 (26 Pages)

3 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 4 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 1 of 50 4 5 1 FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS 2 Mathematics and Reading Professional Development (MRPD) Program 3 4UPDATE OF INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS 5 6The proposed regulations specify the addition of new training requirements included in 7Senate Bill (SB) 472 and the State Board of Education (SBE) approved (November, 82006) Guidelines and Criteria for Training Curriculum. 9 10The 45-day public comment period began on January 20, 2006 and ended at 5:00 p.m. 11on March 16, 2007. No written comments were received. A public hearing was held on 12March 16, 2007, at 10:00 a.m. One individual appeared but did not provide oral or 13written comments. 14 15The SBE determined that additional changes to the regulations were needed primarily 16to address recommendations from the SB 472 English Learner Professional 17Development Advisory Committee. In December 2006, the State Superintendent of 18Public Instruction appointed members to the committee. The committee convened and 19made recommendations for the English learner part of the Mathematics and Reading 20Professional Development (MRPD) program. Most of the changes included in the 21amended regulations are due to the committee’s recommendations. In addition to 22miscellaneous clarifications, specific purposes of the proposed amendments are: (1) to 23include the recommendations for the guidelines and criteria for training curriculum of 24English learners; (2) to include recommendations for the guidelines and criteria for 25English learner training providers, (3) to include recommendations for implementation of 26the English learner part of the MRPD program; (4) to clarify funding as to the 80 hours 27of follow up professional development, including English learner professional 28development, and (5) to clarify the review process for training curriculum and training 29providers related to the initial forty hours of training and English learner training. 30 31A first 15-day comment period commenced from May 11, 2007 to May 25, 2007, 32inclusive. A second 15-day comment period related to documents relied upon 33commenced from June 7, 2007, to June 21, 2007, inclusive. A third 15-day comment 34period commenced from July 13, 2007, to July 27, 2007, inclusive. 35 36Before discussing the public comments received and the attendant additional changes 37to the regulations, the SBE provides the following updates regarding the overall 38structure of the regulations and the initial changes made for the first comment period. 39 40Section 11981.1 Funding Allocation for Program Training Pursuant to Education 41Code Section 99237. 42 43This section is amended to clarify its application to funding pursuant to Education Code 44section 99237, as opposed to Education Code section 99237.5.

61 All section references are to the California Code of Regulations, title 5, unless otherwise stated.

7 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 8 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 2 of 50 4 5 1Section 11981.3. Funding Allocation for Teachers of English Learners. 2 3This section is added to address funding allocation for professional development of 4teachers who teach English learner pupils. 5 6Section 11983. Instructional Materials. 7 8This section is amended to ensure pupils are provided with currently adopted 9instructional materials. 10 11Section11984. Training Curriculum for the Initial Forty Hours. 12 13This section is amended to clarify its application to training curriculum developed for 14training pursuant to Education Code section 99237, as opposed to Education Code 15section 99237.5. 16 17Section 11984.5. Curriculum Review of the Initial Forty Hours. 18 19The information contained in this new section number borrows from what had been 20proposed, in large measure, under a different section number and clarifies that it applies 21to a curriculum review for training curriculum developed pursuant to Education Code 22section 99237, as opposed to Education Code section 99237.5. The section also 23clarifies the review process and makes explicit that the SBE may base its approval or 24disapproval of a training curriculum on the items referenced in the section or the 25recommendation of the review panel. 26 27Section 11984.6. Training Providers of the Initial Forty Hours. 28 29The information contained in this new section number borrows from what had been 30proposed, in large measure, under a different section number and clarifies that it applies 31to a review of a prospective provider pursuant to Education Code section 99237, as 32opposed to Education Code section 99237.5. The section also clarifies that a review 33process applies, that the SBE may base its approval or disapproval of a training 34provider on the items referenced in the section or the recommendation of the review 35panel, and that an approved provider may only use specified curriculum. 36 37Section 11985. Training Curriculum for English Learner Professional 38Development. 39 40This section is substantially similar to section 11984, except that it applies to training 41curriculum developed for training pursuant to Education Code section 99237.5 (English 42learner training) as opposed to Education Code section 99237. 43 44Section 11985.5. Curriculum Review of English Learner Professional 45Development. 46 47This section is substantially similar to section 11984.5, except that it applies to 48curriculum review for training pursuant to Education Code section 99237.5 (English 49learner training) as opposed to Education Code section 99237.

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 3 of 50 4 5 1Section 11985.6. Training Providers of English Learner Professional 2Development. 3 4This section is substantially similar to section 11984.6 except that it applies to the 5approval of training providers pursuant to Education Code section 99237.5 (English 6learner training) as opposed to Education Code section 99237. 7 8COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD THE FIRST 15-DAY NOTICE AND 9PROPOSED REGULATION TEXT WAS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC 10 11The modified text was made available to the public from May 11, 2007 through 12May 25, 2007, inclusive. The following comments were received: 13 14 Aida Molina, Executive Director, Instructional Services Bakersfield City School 15 District and in an e-mail dated May 25, 2007, submitted the following two comments: 16 17Comment #1: Regarding Section 11985, page 16, line 16, it mentions “scientifically 18based research.” What specific research is this bill referring too? The linguistic and 19language acquisition research is very broad and spans a variety of theories, 20approaches, and biases about language. 21 22Response: The language for this section and all others pertaining to “scientifically 23based research” is revised as follows: “current and confirmed scientific research.” 24 25Comment #2: Regarding Section 11985.6, page 20, line 26 it states, “Thirty-percent for 26presentation and direct instruction of EL theoretical framework, research, and academic 27content standards while using the ELD standards to deliver instruction.” Which EL 28theoretical framework? It is clear that the authors have a picture of what needs to 29happen in this training but I am unclear how this should be executed and implemented. 30From the text, I am also unsure what the content of the training will be and what my 31teachers will receive as participants. Furthermore, I need to know what the theoretical 32bias will be. As an administrator, I need to know what they will bring back to the 33classroom and how that will transfer to achievement. 34 35Response: Section 11985.6 (a)(8)(A) is revised as follows: “Thirty percent for 36presentation and direct instruction of current and confirmed scientific research as 37related to the effective instruction of English learners, including the use of level of 38language proficiency and the ELD standards to scaffold instruction, allowing access to 39core, grade-level content area instruction.” 40 41 Martha Hernandez, President, California Association for Bilingual Education 42 (CABE), in a fax dated May 25, 2007, submitted the following ten comments: 43 44Comment #1: Regarding Section 11985.6, page 18, line 32, SB472 was amended to 45specifically include, among other provisions, professional development for teachers 46instructing students who are English language learners (ELL), within the 40 of the 80 47follow up-hours. It is critical, therefore, that the providers who will be training the trainers

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 4 of 50 4 5 1have expertise and experience in developing and providing this type of professional 2development. The proposed regulations do not ensure that the training providers 3possess the knowledge and experience in developing and implementing a successful 4training program specific to English learners. Therefore, it is recommended that a new 5subdivision (a) be inserted: "(a) Evidence of providing EL professional development that 6addresses teaching in multi-subject, self-contained classrooms or discipline specific 7classrooms, linguistically and culturally diverse student population with attention to all 8four domains of language specific to the development of language and literacy for 9English learners". 10 11Response: Education Code section 99237.5(a)(A-D) outlines the quality standards that 12providers of the must possess to be considered as SB 472 English learner professional 13development providers. The criteria and provisions included in sections 11985 through 14and 11985.6 include sufficient requirements to ensure that teachers are being trained by 15providers who have the knowledge and experience to carry out the requirements under 16Education Code section 99237.5, specifically that the training be “designed to help all 17pupils gain mastery of the California academic content standards with special emphasis 18on English language learners and pupils with exceptional needs.” 19 20Comment #2: Regarding Section 11985.5(b), it is recommended that a call for the 21establishment of a review panel to be comprised of one or more reviewers designated 22by the State Board of Education (SBE) for the purpose or reviewing and approving the 23training providers and the training curriculum. Concern was expressed that the panels 24should be comprised of more than two people. 25 26Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. The review panel for the initial 27training and the English learner training will now consist of two or more reviewers. 28 29Comment #3: Regarding Section 11985.6(b), it is unclear as to whether a committee 30was established to advise the State Superintendent on SB 472. Perhaps this advisory 31committee can be used instead of the review panels. Using the SB 472 advisory 32committee would save time and money specific to this process. More importantly, it 33would provide “reviewers” that are qualified, experienced and with expertise specific to 34professional development and training curriculum specific to ELL students. It is 35recommended that the SBE utilize the SB 472 advisory committee instead of the review 36panels. 37 38Response: Education Code section 99237.5(h) required the State Superintendent of 39Public Instruction (SSPI) to appoint an advisory committee for the purpose of making 40recommendations, including, but not limited to, all of the following: training criteria, 41training providers, implementation of the program, and whether or not this type of 42training to teachers of English learners in other subjects besides reading and 43mathematics is appropriate. The Advisory Committee met on four separate occasions 44and provided recommendations to the SSPI. Although it is anticipated that members of 45the Advisory Committee will also function as reviewers on the English Learner 46Professional Development (ELPD) review panel, other qualified individuals will also be 47appointed to function in this capacity.

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 5 of 50 4 5 1Comment #4: Regarding Section 11985(a)(4) Training Curriculum for English Learner 2Professional Development, page 16, lines 18-20, it is recommended that language be 3inserted that includes other types of significant assessments. Inclusion of other types of 4assessments, in addition to standardized tests, is important and necessary in order to 5be better able to understand and utilize all assessments administered to ELL students. 6The following language is recommended: "(4) Readings and discussions of other 7pertinent materials related to EL pupils which address the value of the diagnostic nature 8of language and literacy, multiple measures both formative and summative 9assessments, including but not limited to, the CELDT, standardized tests, the STAR 10system and the CAHSEE; and." 11 12Response: Education Code section 99237.5(b)(5) requires that instruction be included 13pertaining to analyzing and discussing multiple assessments. The public 14recommendation is accepted in part. Section 11985(a)(4) is revised as follows: 15“Readings and discussions of other pertinent materials related to the language and 16literacy of EL pupils which address the value of the diagnostic nature of standardized 17tests, the STAR system, the CELDT, curriculum embedded assessments, and the 18CAHSEE[.]” 19 20Comment #5: Regarding Section 11985(b), page 16, line 25, the insertion of the word 21"language" would ensure that both English language acquisition and literacy needs are 22being addressed for students who are English learners. Therefore the following revision 23is recommended: "(b) ELD instruction designed to meet the language and academic 24instructional needs of EL pupils, which emphasizes the following....” 25 26Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Section 11985(b) is revised as 27follows: "ELD instruction designed to meet the language and academic instructional 28needs of EL pupils, that emphasizes the following....” 29 30Comment #6: Regarding Section 11985(d)(1), page 17, line 13, the insertion of new 31language ensures that all four areas critical to English acquisition and literacy are 32developed, not just vocabulary and writing development as proposed. Therefore the 33following revision is recommended: "Knowledge of reading/language arts instruction to 34support EL pupils in oral language development, vocabulary development and writing 35development" 36 37Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Section 11985(d)(1)is revised as 38follows: "Knowledge of reading/language arts instruction to support EL pupils in oral 39language development, vocabulary development, and writing development." 40 41Comment #7: Regarding Section 11985.5(c)(3), Curriculum Review of English Learner 42Professional Development, page 18, line 25, the following recommendation would 43ensure that the training curriculum to be used by providers of teachers of ELL students 44will also have knowledge of English language development. This is equally important in 45light of the fact that you will have teachers instructing ELL students with no or very little

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 6 of 50 4 5 1knowledge of English. It is recommended that the subdivision be revised to read: "(3) 2Knowledge and understanding of current EL research with regard to teaching 3mathematics, language arts and English language development." 4 5Response: This recommendation is accepted. Section 11985.5(c)(5) is deleted. Section 611985.5(c)(3) is revised as follows: “Knowledge and understanding of current and 7confirmed scientific EL research with regard to teaching mathematics or 8reading/language arts and English language development, including how to apply this 9research to classroom practice in order to increase student learning and language 10acquisition.” 11 12Comment #8: Regarding Section 11985.5(c)(7), page 19, lines 2-5, it is recommended 13that this subdivision be deleted and re-letter subsequent subdivisions. This section is 14specific to the "40 follow up" hours of ELL professional development. The content of the 15proposed subdivision (c)(7) is the content that should be contained in the first/initial 40 16hours or the other 40 hours of follow up. The 40 hours specific to ELL professional 17development will barely provide the time or content specific to ELL instruction. 18 19Response: The intent of the ELPD is to deepen the knowledge and application of the 20initial SB 472 training. Providing context during the ELPD training with respect to the 21frameworks is essential. Section 11985.5(c)(7) is renumbered as Section 11985.5(c)(6) 22and will not be deleted. However, it is revised as follows: “Knowledge and 23understanding of how to teach the ELD components of the SBE adopted instructional 24materials for kindergarten through grade eight or standards-aligned instructional 25materials for grades nine through twelve[.]” 26 27Comment #9: Regarding Section 11985.5(e), page 19, line 24, and 11985.6(d), page 2823, line 3, it is recommended that language be inserted in subdivision (e) that would 29require the panel to also provide to the State Board of Education (SBE) the reason(s) 30for their recommendation of approval or disapproval of a curriculum. Insert language 31that would require the SBE to forward a written letter to those entities whose curriculum 32was disapproved and the reason(s) for disapproval. Requiring the submission of why a 33curriculum was disapproved or approved is good public policy and provides for 34important transparency to the process. 35 36Response: Sections 11984.5(e) and 11985.5(e) regarding the review panel’s 37recommendation for approval or disapproval of a prospective provider’s curriculum is 38substantially revised as follows: “If the review panel determines that the prospective 39provider’s curriculum does not meet the requirements of this section based on 40documented findings, the review panel shall confer with the prospective provider to 41correct deficiencies for resubmission. The review panel shall confer with the prospective 42provider on as many occasions as the review panel deems productive. Thereafter, if the 43prospective provider’s curriculum is deemed to meet the requirements of this section 44based on documented findings, the review panel shall recommend to the SBE that the 45prospective provider’s curriculum to be approved.”

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 7 of 50 4 5 1Sections 11984.6(d) and 11985.6(d) regarding the review panel’s recommendation for 2approval or disapproval of a prospective provider’s written proposal is substantially 3revised as follows: “If the review panel determines that the prospective provider’s written 4proposal does not meet the requirements of this section based on documented findings, 5the review panel shall confer with the prospective provider to correct deficiencies for 6resubmission. The review panel shall confer with the prospective provider on as many 7occasions as the review panel deems productive. Thereafter, if the prospective 8provider’s written proposal is deemed to meet the requirements of this section based on 9documented findings, the review panel shall recommend to the SBE that the 10prospective provider be approved as a provider.” 11 12Comment #10: Regarding Section 11984.6, Training Providers of the Initial Forty 13Hours, page 14, line 8, it is suggested to delete the words "may include" and insert 14"including.” Requiring a prospective provider's experience and qualifications regarding 15training curriculum for special education students or students who are English learners 16should be required not permissive, as is currently proposed. These are two student sub- 17groups requiring special attention on reading/language arts skills therefore prospective 18trainers should demonstrate their experience and qualifications in the delivery of a 19training curriculum to these students. 20 21Response: The criteria and provisions included in Sections 11984 through 11984.6 22include sufficient requirements to ensure that teachers are being trained by providers 23who have the knowledge and experience to carry out the requirements under Education 24Code section 99237, specifically that the training be “designed to help all pupils gain 25mastery of the California academic content standards with special emphasis on English 26language learners and pupils with exceptional needs.” 27 28 Laurie Olsen, Executive Director, California Tomorrow, in a fax dated 29 May 25, 2007, submitted the following six comments: 30 31Comment #1: Regarding Section 11985.6, page 18, line 32, it is essential that providers 32of professional development under this program have expertise related to meeting the 33needs of English Learners. We recommend adding a requirement that providers 34demonstrate evidence of having provided English Learner professional development 35that addresses the specific language needs (overcoming the language barrier to 36access, and the development of academic language in all four domains) of English 37Learners. 38 39Response: Education Code section 99237.5(a)(A-D) outlines the quality standards that 40providers must possess to be considered as SB 472 English learner professional 41development providers. The criteria and provisions included in Sections 11985 through 42and 11985.6 include sufficient requirements to ensure that teachers are being trained by 43providers who have the knowledge and experience to carry out the requirements under 44Education Code section 99237.5, specifically that the training be “designed to help all 45pupils gain mastery of the California academic content standards with special emphasis 46on English language learners and pupils with exceptional needs.”

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 8 of 50 4 5 1Comment #2: Whatever panel is established to review the providers and curriculum 2must similarly include deep expertise on English Learners. We recommend perhaps 3using the existing SB 472 Advisory Committee for this purpose. 4 5Response: Education Code section 99237.5(h) required the State Superintendent of 6Public Instruction (SSPI) to appoint an advisory committee for the purpose of making 7recommendations, including, but not limited to, all of the following: training criteria, 8training providers, implementation of the program, and whether or not this type of 9training to teachers of English learners in other subjects besides reading and 10mathematics is appropriate. The Advisory Committee met on four separate occasions 11and provided recommendations to the SSPI. Although it is anticipated that members of 12the Advisory Committee will also function as reviewers on the ELPD review panel, other 13qualified individuals will also be appointed to function in this capacity. 14 15Comment #3: Regarding Section 11985(b), page 16, line 25, in order to ensure that the 16language challenges facing English Learners are addressed adequately, it is 17recommended this section is revised to read: “ELD instruction designed to meet the 18language and academic instructional needs of EL pupils, which emphasizes the 19following….” 20 21Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Section 11985(b) is revised as 22follows: "ELD instruction designed to meet the language and academic instructional 23needs of EL pupils, that emphasizes the following....” 24 25Comment #4: Regarding Section 11985(d)(1), page 17, line 13, it is recommended that 26this section be revised to read: “(1) Knowledge of reading/language arts instruction to 27support - EL pupils in oral language development, vocabulary development and writing 28development.” 29 30Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Section 11985(d)(1) is renumbered 31to Section 11985(c)(1) and is revised as follows: "(1) Knowledge of reading/language 32arts instruction to support EL pupils in oral language development, vocabulary 33development, and writing development." 34 35Comment #5: Regarding Section 11985.5(e), page 19, line 24, and 11985.6(d), page 3623, line 3, for clarity and credibility, it is important that SBE make public reasons for 37disapproval of any curriculum. Insert language in subdivision (e) that would require the 38panel to also provide to the State Board of Education (SBE) the reason(s) for their 39recommendation of approval or disapproval of a curriculum. 40 41Response: Sections 11984.5(e) and 11985.5(e) regarding the review panel’s 42recommendation for approval or disapproval of a prospective provider’s curriculum is 43substantially revised as follows: “If the review panel determines that the prospective 44provider’s curriculum does not meet the requirements of this section based on 45documented findings, the review panel shall confer with the prospective provider to 46correct deficiencies for resubmission. The review panel shall confer with the prospective

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 9 of 50 4 5 1provider on as many occasions as the review panel deems productive. Thereafter, if the 2prospective provider’s curriculum is deemed to meet the requirements of this section 3based on documented findings, the review panel shall recommend to the SBE that the 4prospective provider’s curriculum to be approved.” 5 6Sections 11984.6(d) and 11985.6(d) regarding the review panel’s recommendation for 7approval or disapproval of a prospective provider’s written proposal is substantially 8revised as follows: “If the review panel determines that the prospective provider’s written 9proposal does not meet the requirements of this section based on documented findings, 10the review panel shall confer with the prospective provider to correct deficiencies for 11resubmission. The review panel shall confer with the prospective provider on as many 12occasions as the review panel deems productive. Thereafter, if the prospective 13provider’s written proposal is deemed to meet the requirements of this section based on 14documented findings, the review panel shall recommend to the SBE that the 15prospective provider be approved as a provider.” 16 17Comment #6: Regarding Section 11984.6, Training Providers of the Initial Forty Hours, 18page 14, line 8, it is recommended to delete the words “may include” and insert 19“including.” 20 21Response: The criteria and provisions included in Sections 11984 through and 11984.6 22include sufficient requirements to ensure that teachers are being trained by providers 23who have the knowledge and experience to carry out the requirements under Education 24Code section 99237, specifically that the training be “designed to help all pupils gain 25mastery of the California academic content standards with special emphasis on English 26language learners and pupils with exceptional needs.” 27 28 Guillermo Gomez, Elementary Content Expert, LAUSD-District Reading 29 Programs, in an e-mail dated May 25, 2007, submitted the following five comments: 30 31Comment #1: Regarding Section 11983.5, page 9, line 7, the specially designed 32instructional materials must be from the core instruction. I hope we are not allowing 33supplementary materials to supplant instruction; this would take us farther away from 34our intended goals, when we do not use standards-based materials. 35 36Response: It is anticipated that Section 11983.5 will be substantially revised and/or 37deleted once the adoptions in mathematics and language arts occur. Until that time, 38Section 11983.5 will remain as is in order to provide for those districts utilizing its 39provisions. 40 41Comment #2: Regarding Section 11985, page 16, line 15, it is recommended to remove 42the word “relevant” from this line. If we are only to train relevant standards, I would like 43to know which standards do not count for children at-risk. 44 45Response: This recommendation is accepted in part. Section 11985(a)(2) is revised as 46follows: “A thorough review of the specific sections of the curriculum frameworks that 47pertain to EL pupils, academic content standards, and ELD standards;”

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 10 of 50 4 5 1Comment #3: Regarding Section 11985, page 17, line 23, it is recommended that the 2word “design” be removed from this line. We need to pre-teach, scaffold, and nourish 3the core curriculum through instructional density and repeated exposures. We do not 4have the luxury of having teachers create new curriculum lessons across subjects. We 5need to work within existing instructional structures to maximize success for both 6teachers and students alike. 7 8Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Section 11985(d)(6) is renumbered 9to Section 11985(c)(5) and is revised as follows: “Analysis of second language markers 10in oral and written language production to inform instruction.” 11 12Comment #4: Regarding Section 11985.5, page 18, line 22, it is recommended that 13“various” instructional strategies be stricken, to read scientifically-based instructional 14strategies. There is a finite number of scientifically-based strategies and we can at least 15agree on those (example SDAIE instruction), rather than open a buffet line of 16techniques that have not been subject to researched-based studies. 17 18Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Section 11985.5(c)(2) is revised as 19follows: “Knowledge and understanding of how standards are supported through the 20curriculum frameworks in regard to differentiating instruction through universal access 21related to mathematics or reading/language arts for EL pupils[.]” 22 23Comment #5: Regarding Section 11985.6, page 20, line 26, what is the EL theoretical 24framework? This is ambiguous language at best and is a mythical term for 25experimentation. This Theoretical Framework does not have a linguistically competent 26track-record for districts or providers to quantify in training. Let us stick to the language 27of the ELA and Math frameworks, that is difficult enough for trainers and providers to 28follow and we can maintain our focus on bridging the ELD standards to reach academic 29benchmarks for children. 30 31Response: This recommendation is accepted. Section 11985.6(a)(8)(A) is revised as 32follows: “Thirty percent for presentation and direct instruction of current and confirmed 33scientific research as related to the effective instruction of English learners, including 34the use of level of language proficiency and the ELD standards to scaffold instruction, 35allowing access to core, grade-level content area instruction.” 36 37 Leslie Schwarze, Novato Unified School District, in an e-mail dated May 25, 2007, 38 submitted the following six comments: 39 40Comment #1: Regarding Section 11983.5(2), page 9, lines 7-11, there should be 41language here that designates a sunset date considering we are about to go through a 42new adoption cycle for both math and language arts. 43 44Response: It is anticipated that Section 11983.5 will be substantially revised and/or 45deleted once the adoptions in mathematics and language arts occur. Until that time, 46Section 11983.5 will remain as is in order to provide for those districts utilizing its 47provisions.

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 11 of 50 4 5 1Comment #2: Regarding Section 11984.5(b), page 11, line 5, 11984.6(b), page 12, line 228, the old language was much better, “one or more” will allow one and that is not 3acceptable. 4 5Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. The review panel for the initial 6training and the English learner training will now consist of two or more reviewers. 7 8Comment #3: Regarding Section 11984.6(11), page 14, lines 1-3, this should also be 9included in the district application so that it is apparent from the very beginning that 10someone must be present at the training. 11 12Response: It is anticipated that this recommendation will be taken into consideration 13when the SB 472 LEA application is revised. 14 15Comment #4: Regarding Section 11985.6(A), page 20, lines 26 and 27, please strike 16“EL theoretical framework.” It is not necessary as this section is written. 17 18Response: This recommendation is accepted. Section 11985.6(a)(8)(A) is revised as 19follows: “Thirty percent for presentation and direct instruction of current and confirmed 20scientific research as related to the effective instruction of English learners, including 21the use of level of language proficiency and the ELD standards to scaffold instruction, 22allowing access to core, grade-level content area instruction.” 23 24Comment #5: Regarding Section 11985.6(A), page 20, line 28, it is recommended that 25the word “deliver” be changed to “scaffold.” 26 27Response: This recommendation is accepted. Section 11985.6(a)(8)(A) is revised as 28follows: “Thirty percent for presentation and direct instruction of current and confirmed 29scientific research as related to the effective instruction of English learners, including 30the use of level of language proficiency and the ELD standards to scaffold instruction, 31allowing access to core, grade-level content area instruction.” 32 33Comment #6: Regarding Section 11985 (New), page 15, lines 30-32, page 16, lines 1- 3432, and page 17, lines 1-25, regarding training providers and training curriculum need to 35be consistent with each other. As written they are not. Also, it appears that far more 36than 40 hours will be required to accomplish what is in the new section, 11985. As 37written it goes beyond the scope of the law. 38 39Response: Sections 11985 and 11985.6 have different criteria. Section 11985 40concentrates on the requirements placed upon a training provider (e.g. application) and 41Section 11985.6 concentrates on the requirements placed upon the training curriculum 42(e.g. content). Both sections include recommendations submitted by the SB 472 English 43Learner Professional Development (ELPD) Advisory Committee. The recommendations 44have been reviewed and are in alignment with SBE policy.

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 12 of 50 4 5 1 Gabriel Medel, Executive Director, Parents for Unity, in an e-mail dated 2 May 25, 2007, submitted ten comments: 3 4Comment #1: Regarding Section 11985.6, page 18, line 32, SB 472 was amended to 5include, among other provisions, professional development specific to ELs for teachers 6instructing these students, within the 40 of the 80 follow up hours. It is critical therefore 7that the providers who will be training the trainers have expertise and experience in 8developing and providing this type of professional development. The proposed 9regulations do not ensure that the training providers possess the knowledge and 10experience in developing and implementing a successful training program specific to 11English learners. It is recommended that a new subdivision (a) be inserted: “(a) 12Evidence of providing EL professional development that addresses teaching in multi- 13subject, self-contained classrooms or discipline specific classrooms, linguistically and 14culturally diverse student population with attention to all four domains of language 15specific to the development of language and literacy for English learners”. 16 17Response: Education Code section 99237.5(a)(A-D) outlines quality standards each 18English learner professional development provider must possess. The criteria and 19provisions included in Sections 11985 through and 11985.6 include sufficient 20requirements to ensure that teachers are being trained by providers who have the 21knowledge and experience to carry out the requirements under Education Code section 2299237.5, specifically that the training be “designed to help all pupils gain mastery of the 23California academic content standards with special emphasis on English language 24learners and pupils with exceptional needs.” 25 26Comment #2: Regarding Sections 11985.5 (b) and 11985.6(b), it is recommended that 27a call for the establishment of a review panel to be comprised of one or more reviewers 28designated by the State Board of Education (SBE) for the purpose of reviewing and 29approving the training providers and the training curriculum. It is recommended that the 30SBE utilize the SB 472 Advisory Committee instead of the review panels. 31 32Response: The first part of this recommendation is accepted as is. The review panel for 33the initial training and the English learner training will now consist of two or more 34reviewers. The second part of this recommendation is not accepted. Although it is 35anticipated that members of the Advisory Committee will also function as reviewers on 36the ELPD review panel, other qualified individuals will also be appointed to function in 37this capacity. 38 39Comment #3: Regarding Section 11985(a)(4),Training Curriculum for English Learner 40Professional Development, page 16, lines 18-20, it is recommended that language be 41inserted that includes other types of significant assessments. Inclusion of other types of 42assessments, in addition to standardized tests, is important and necessary in order to 43be better able to understand and utilize all assessments administered to ELL students. 44The following language is recommended: “(4) Readings and discussions of other 45pertinent materials related to EL pupils which address the value of the diagnostic nature

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 13 of 50 4 5 1of language and literacy, multiple measures both formative and summative 2assessments, including but not limited to, the CELDT, standardized tests, the STAR 3system and the CAHSEE; and.…” 4 5Response: Education Code section 99237.5(b)(5) requires that instruction be included 6pertaining to analyzing and discussing multiple assessments. Section 11985(a)(4) is 7revised as follows: “Readings and discussions of other pertinent materials related to the 8language and literacy of EL pupils which address the value of the diagnostic nature of 9standardized tests, the STAR system, the CELDT, curriculum embedded assessments, 10and the CAHSEE[.]” 11 12Comment #4: Regarding Section 11985(b), page 16, line 25, the insertion of the word 13"language" would ensure that both English language acquisition and literacy needs are 14being addressed for students who are English learners. Therefore the following revision 15is recommended: “(b) ELD instruction designed to meet the language and academic 16instructional needs of EL pupils, which emphasizes the following….” 17 18Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Section 11985(b) is revised as 19follows: "ELD instruction designed to meet the language and academic instructional 20needs of EL pupils, that emphasizes the following....” 21 22Comment #5: Regarding Section 11985(d)(1), page 17, line 13, the insertion of new 23language ensures that all four areas critical to English acquisition and literacy are 24developed, not just vocabulary and writing development as proposed. Therefore the 25following revision is recommended: "(1) Knowledge of reading/language arts instruction 26to support EL pupils in oral language development, vocabulary development and writing 27development." 28 29Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Section 11985(d)(1) is revised as 30follows: "Knowledge of reading/language arts instruction to support EL pupils in oral 31language development, vocabulary development, and writing development." 32 33Comment #6: Regarding Section 11985.5(c)(3), Curriculum Review of English Learner 34Professional Development, page 18, line 25, the following recommendation would 35ensure that the training curriculum to be used by providers of teachers of ELL students 36will also have knowledge of English language development. This is equally important in 37light of the fact that you will have teachers instructing ELL students with no or very little 38knowledge of English. It is recommended that the subdivision be revised to read: "(3) 39Knowledge and understanding of current EL research with regard to teaching 40mathematics, language arts and English language development." 41 42Response: This recommendation is accepted. Section 11985.5(c)(5) is deleted. Section 4311985.5(c)(3) is revised as follows: “Knowledge and understanding of current and 44confirmed scientific EL research with regard to teaching mathematics or 45reading/language arts and English language development, including how to apply this 46research to classroom practice in order to increase student learning and language 47acquisition.”

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 14 of 50 4 5 1Comment #7: Regarding Section 11985.5(c)(7), page 19, lines 2-5, it is recommended 2that this subdivision be deleted and re-letter subsequent subdivisions. This section is 3specific to the "40 follow up" hours of ELL professional development. The content of the 4proposed subdivision (c)(7) is the content that should be contained in the first/initial 40 5hours or the other 40 hours of follow up. The 40 hours specific to ELL professional 6development will barely provide the time or content specific to ELL instruction. 7 8Response: The intent of the ELPD is to deepen the knowledge and application of the 9initial SB 472 training. Providing context during the ELPD training with respect to the 10frameworks is essential. Section 11985.5(c)(7) is renumbered to Section 11985.5(c)(6), 11and it will not be deleted. However, it is revised as follows: “Knowledge and 12understanding of how to teach the ELD components of the SBE adopted instructional 13materials for kindergarten through grade eight or standards-aligned instructional 14materials for grades nine through twelve.” 15 16Comment #8: Regarding Section 11985.5(e), page 19, line 24 and 11985.6(d), page 1723, line 3, it is recommended that language be inserted in subdivision (e) that would 18require the panel to also provide to the State Board of Education (SBE) the reason(s) 19for their recommendation of approval or disapproval of a curriculum. Insert language 20that would require the SBE to forward a written letter to those entities whose curriculum 21was disapproved and the reason(s) for disapproval. Requiring the submission of why a 22curriculum was disapproved or approved is good public policy and provides for 23important transparency to the process. 24 25Response: Sections 11984.5(e) and 11985.5(e) regarding the review panel’s 26recommendation for approval or disapproval of a prospective provider’s curriculum is 27substantially revised as follows: “If the review panel determines that the prospective 28provider’s curriculum does not meet the requirements of this section based on 29documented findings, the review panel shall confer with the prospective provider to 30correct deficiencies for resubmission. The review panel shall confer with the prospective 31provider on as many occasions as the review panel deems productive. Thereafter, if the 32prospective provider’s curriculum is deemed to meet the requirements of this section 33based on documented findings, the review panel shall recommend to the SBE that the 34prospective provider’s curriculum to be approved.” 35 36Sections 11984.6(d) and 11985.6(d) regarding the review panel’s recommendation for 37approval or disapproval of a prospective provider’s written proposal is substantially 38revised as follows: “If the review panel determines that the prospective provider’s written 39proposal does not meet the requirements of this section based on documented findings, 40the review panel shall confer with the prospective provider to correct deficiencies for 41resubmission. The review panel shall confer with the prospective provider on as many 42occasions as the review panel deems productive. Thereafter, if the prospective 43provider’s written proposal is deemed to meet the requirements of this section based on 44documented findings, the review panel shall recommend to the SBE that the 45prospective provider be approved as a provider.”

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 15 of 50 4 5 1Comment #9: Regarding Section 11983, page 8, line 9, Education Code section 299237(a)(3)(A)(B) refers to English Language arts and not “reading/language” as 3proposed. 4 5Response: Section 11983(b) is revised as follows: “An LEA participating in the program 6must provide each pupil with currently adopted instructional materials that are aligned to 7the state content standards in English/language arts in accordance with Education Code 8section 99237(a)(3)(A) and (B).” 9 10Comment #10: Regarding Section 11984.6, Training Providers of the Initial Forty 11Hours, page 14, line 8, it is suggested to delete the words "may include" and insert 12"including." Requiring a prospective provider's experience and qualifications regarding 13training curriculum for special education students or students who are English learners 14should be required not permissive, as is currently proposed. These are two student sub- 15groups requiring special attention on reading/language arts skills therefore prospective 16trainers should demonstrate their experience and qualifications in the delivery of a 17training curriculum to these students. 18 19Response: The criteria and provisions included in Sections 11984 through 11984.6 20include sufficient requirements to ensure that teachers are being trained by providers 21who have the knowledge and experience to carry out the requirements under Education 22Code section 99237, specifically that the training be “designed to help all pupils gain 23mastery of the California academic content standards with special emphasis on English 24language learners and pupils with exceptional needs.” 25 26 Alice R. Furry, Sharon Van Vleck, Beth Rice, Reading Lions Center, in an e-mail 27 dated May 25 2007, submitted fifty-six comments: 28 29Comment #1: Regarding Section 11980, page 1, lines 7-18, we recommend the 30following: Delete. Teacher Eligibility: reference to “a classroom that is not self- 31contained,” because it is not a requirement of Education Code section 99233(a)(1) or 32(a)(2). 33 34Response: The reference to “a classroom that is not self-contained” provides eligibility 35to K-12 teachers that teach in this particular school setting. Section 11980 will not be 36revised. 37 38Comment #2: Regarding Section 11983.5, page 9, lines 9-11, we recommend the 39following: Change: “. . . approved and contained in the K-8 Reading/Language Arts and 40English Language Development basic and intervention programs adopted in January 412002 as approved by the State Board;” Delete: “ by the Chair of the Curriculum…” 42because the information is inaccurate. 43 44Response: This recommendation is accepted in part. Section 11983.5(b)(2) is revised 45as follows: “The LEA has in place specially designed instructional materials 46(components) to address the needs of EL pupils that is comparable to the instructional

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 16 of 50 4 5 1materials (components) approved and contained in the RLA/ELD programs adopted in 2January 2002 as approved by the State Board.” 3 4Comment #3: Regarding Section 11984.5, page 11, lines 4-5, we recommend the 5following: Change: “at least two qualified reviewers” because it is important to have 6consistency in the application of judgments of compliance with curriculum training 7requirements for a 5-day training; and this was a requirement for AB 466 reviews. 8 9Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. The review panel for the initial 10training and the English learner training will now consist of two or more reviewers. 11 12Comment #4: Regarding page 11, line 8 we recommend the following: Add: “(1) 13mathematics and English/language arts content standards” because it reinforces that 14these are the two academic content standards for the purpose of these Administrative 15Regulations. 16 17Response: Section 11984.5(b)(1)(2) requires a qualified reviewer to “have knowledge 18of information related to mathematics or reading, as applicable, including: (1) Academic 19content standards; (2) Curriculum frameworks.” The reference to mathematics and 20English/language arts content standards is already included in these regulations. 21 22Comment #5: Regarding page 11, line 8, we recommend the following: Add: “(2) 23mathematics and reading/language arts curriculum frameworks” because it reinforces 24that these are the two specific curriculum frameworks for the purpose of these 25Administrative Regulations. 26 27Response: Section 11984.5(b)(1)(2) requires a qualified reviewer to “have knowledge 28of information related to mathematics or reading as applicable, including: (1) Academic 29content standards; (2) Curriculum frameworks.” The reference to mathematics and 30English/language arts content standards is already included in these regulations. 31 32Comment #6: Regarding page 11, line 12, we recommend the following: Add: “(4) 33Current and confirmed scientific research as defined in Education Code section 3444757.5(j) related to the instructional practices for mathematics or reading/language 35arts” because it provides Education Code definition of research. 36 37Response: The language for this section and all others pertaining to “scientifically 38based research” is revised as follows: “current and confirmed scientific research.” 39 40Comment #7: Regarding page 11, line 13, we recommend the following: Change/Add: 41“(5) Linkage between assessment and curriculum with the use of standardized tests, 42curriculum-embedded tests, the STAR system, CELDT, and CAHSEE for diagnostic 43information related to EL pupils” because it provides consistency of reference to 44relevant assessments related to EL pupils throughout these Administrative Regulations. 45 46Response: This recommendation is accepted in part, and because this section 47references the initial 40 hour training, Section 11984.5(b)(5) is revised as follows:

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 17 of 50 4 5 1“Linkage between curriculum and assessment with the use of standardized tests, 2curriculum-embedded tests, the STAR system, CELDT, and CAHSEE for diagnostic 3information related to all pupils.” 4 5Comment #8: Regarding page 11, line 18, we recommend the following: Add: “(c) The 6review panel shall review and document findings for each training curriculum . . .” 7because AB 466 review practice required reviewers to document both recommended 8and non-recommended curriculum trainings for record of citations given for Reviewers’ 9decision. 10 11Comment #10: Regarding section 11984.5, page 12, line 8, we recommend the 12following: Add: “(d) . . . referenced in this section based on documented findings, the 13review panel . . .” because it needs to record the reviewers’ citations given for decision. 14 15Comment #11: Regarding page 12, line 10e, we recommend the following: 16Change/Add: “(e) . . . review panel determines that the training curriculum does not 17meet the requirements in this section based on documented findings, the SBE will 18confer with the owner of the curriculum to correct deficiencies for resubmission” 19because AB 466 review practice followed this procedure and it worked well. 20 21Comment #12: Regarding page 12, lines 11-17, we recommend the following: Delete 22these lines for the wording from comment #11. 23 24Comment #17: Regarding page 15, line 10, we recommend the following: 25Change/Insert language from page 12, line 8: “(c) . . . referenced in this section based 26on documented findings, the review panel . . .” because the review needs to include and 27record the reviewers’ citations given for decision. 28 29Comment #18: Regarding page 15, line 12d, we recommend the following: 30Change/Insert new language from page 12, lines 10e: (d) . . . review panel determines 31that the training curriculum does not meet the requirements in this section based on 32documented findings, the SBE will confer with the owner of the curriculum to correct 33deficiencies for resubmission” because AB 466 review practice followed this procedure 34and it worked well. 35 36Comment #19: Regarding page 15, line 13-20, we recommend the following: Delete 37and use new language from Comment #18. 38 39Comment #43: Regarding page 19, line 15, we recommend the following: 40Change/Insert language from page 12, line 8: “(c) . . . referenced in this section based 41on documented findings, the review panel . . .” because the review needs to record the 42reviewers’ citations given for decision. 43 44Comment #44: Regarding page 19, lines 18-24, we recommend the following: 45Change/Insert language from page 12, lines 10f: (d) . . . review panel determines that 46the training curriculum does not meet the requirements in this section based on 47documented findings, the SBE will confer with the owner of the curriculum to correct

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 18 of 50 4 5 1deficiencies for resubmission.” Delete Lines 18-14 with replaced noted above because 2needs to record the reviewers’ citations given for decision. 3 4Comment #54: Regarding page 22, lines 24-26, we recommend the following: 5Change/Add: “If the review panel determines that the training curriculum meets the 6requirements referenced in this section based on documented findings, the review panel 7shall recommend approval of the curriculum to the SBE.” 8 9Comment #55: Regarding page 22, lines 27-32, we recommend the following: 10Change/Add: If the panel determines that the training curriculum does not meet the 11requirements referenced in this section based on documented findings, the SBE will 12confer with the owner of the curriculum to correct deficiencies for resubmission” 13because it provides consistency with other sections (e.g., p.12, lines 10-17 that were 14modified) of the Administrative Regulations. 15 16Comment #56: Regarding page 23, lines 1-3, we recommend the following: Delete: 17reference the change in Comment #55. 18 19Response to Comments #8, 10, 11, 12, 17, 18, 19, 43, 44, 54, 55, and 56: Sections 2011984.5(e) and 11985.5(e) regarding the review panel’s recommendation for approval 21or disapproval of a prospective provider’s curriculum is substantially revised as follows: 22“If the review panel determines that the prospective provider’s curriculum does not meet 23the requirements of this section based on documented findings, the review panel shall 24confer with the prospective provider to correct deficiencies for resubmission. The review 25panel shall confer with the prospective provider on as many occasions as the review 26panel deems productive. Thereafter, if the prospective provider’s curriculum is deemed 27to meet the requirements of this section based on documented findings, the review 28panel shall recommend to the SBE that the prospective provider’s curriculum to be 29approved.” 30 31Sections 11984.6(d) and 11985.6(d) regarding the review panel’s recommendation for 32approval or disapproval of a prospective provider’s written proposal is substantially 33revised as follows: “If the review panel determines that the prospective provider’s written 34proposal does not meet the requirements of this section based on documented findings, 35the review panel shall confer with the prospective provider to correct deficiencies for 36resubmission. The review panel shall confer with the prospective provider on as many 37occasions as the review panel deems productive. Thereafter, if the prospective 38provider’s written proposal is deemed to meet the requirements of this section based on 39documented findings, the review panel shall recommend to the SBE that the 40prospective provider be approved as a provider.” 41 42Comment #9: Regarding page 11, line 20, we recommend the following: Delete: 43“reading” Add: “English” because it provides the correct title of the English-Language 44Arts Content Standards. 45 46Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Reading/Language Arts Content 47Standards shall be replaced with “English-Language Arts Content Standards” 48throughout the Administrative Regulations. 6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 19 of 50 4 5 1Comment #13: Regarding section 11984.6, page 13, lines 27-28, we recommend the 2following: Change/Insert page 21, lines 1-3: “(C) Thirty percent for practice, planning 3instruction based on data and student work, small and large group discussion, and other 4participant activities to reinforce learning” because it provides additional clarification and 5consist statements throughout these Administrative regulations. 6 7Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Section 11984.6(a)(8)(C) is revised 8as follows: “Thirty percent for practice, planning instruction based on data and student 9work, small and large group discussion, and other participant activities to reinforce 10learning.” 11 12Comment #14: Regarding page 14, line 28, we recommend the following: Change: 13“consisting of at least two qualified reviewers . . .” because it is important to have 14consistency in the application of judgments of compliance with curriculum training 15requirements for 5-day training; and this was a requirement for AB 466 reviews. 16 17Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. The review panel for the initial 18training and the English learner training will now consist of two or more reviewers. 19 20Comment #15: Regarding page 15, line 3, we recommend the following: Add: “(1) 21mathematics and English/language arts content standards” because it reinforces that 22these are the two academic content standards for the purpose of consistently 23throughout these Administrative Regulations. 24 25Response: Section 11984.6(b)(1)(2) requires a qualified reviewer to “have knowledge 26of information related to mathematics or reading as applicable, including: (1) Academic 27content standards; (2) Curriculum frameworks.” The reference to mathematics and 28English/language arts content standards is already included in these regulations. 29 30Comment #16: Regarding page 15, line 4, we recommend the following: Add: “(2) 31mathematics and reading/language arts curriculum frameworks” because it reinforces 32that these are the two specific curriculum frameworks for the purpose of these 33Administrative Regulations. 34 35Response: Section 11984.6(b)(1)(2) requires a qualified reviewer to “have knowledge 36of information related to mathematics or reading as applicable, including: (1) Academic 37content standards; (2) Curriculum frameworks.” The reference to mathematics and 38English/language arts content standards is already included in these regulations. 39 40Comment #20: Regarding section 11985, page 16, line 6-7, we recommend the 41following: Change: “a high level of English language proficiency and mastery of the 42California mathematics and English/language arts content standards that emphasize…” 43and delete “across the curriculum” because it provides clarity of what content standards; 44no Education Code provision in 99237.5 for “across the curriculum.” 45 46Response: This recommendation is accepted. Section 11985(a) is revised as follows: 47“Foundational knowledge specifically designed to assist EL pupils to attain a high level

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 20 of 50 4 5 1of English language proficiency and mastery of the California mathematics and 2English/language arts academic content standards, that emphasizes the following….” 3 4Comment #21: Regarding page 16, line 11, we recommend the following: Edit: lower 5case for certified supplemental materials because it is not an official title. 6 7Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Any reference to certified 8supplemental materials will be in lower case as it is not an official title. 9 10Comment #22: Regarding page 16, line 12, we recommend the following: edit: learners 11because when use as for English learners – capitalization of learner is not required. 12 13Response: Learners was capitalized in this circumstance because it was included as 14part of the title “Certified Supplemental Materials for English Learners.” As this phrase 15will no longer be capitalized, “learners” will not be capitalized. 16 17Comment #23: Regarding page 16, line 12, we recommend the following: Delete 18language from “to assist . . . them” and use language from Comment #24. 19 20Response: This recommendation is accepted with modification. Section 11985(a) is 21revised as follows: “…how to use them to address the instructional needs of all EL 22pupils[.]” 23 24Comment #24: Regarding page 16, line 13, we recommend the following: Delete 25“according” Add: “to meet instructional needs of all EL pupils;” because language should 26be consistent with Education Code 99237.5(a)(4)(C). 27 28Response: Education Code section 99237.5 includes several phrases in reference to 29this recommendation. Section 11985(a) is revised as follows: “…how to use them to 30address the instructional needs of all EL pupils[.]” 31 32Comment #25: Regarding page 16, lines 14-15, we recommend the following: Change: 33“A thorough review of academic content standards and ELD standards relevant to 34instructing EL pupils; and delete: of the curriculum frameworks because reference to 35curriculum frameworks is not in Education Code 99237.5(a)(4)(D). 36 37Response: Although curriculum frameworks are not specifically included in the 38Education Code section 99237.5, the SB 472 ELPD Advisory Committee recommended 39that portions of the framework be included in the content of the training. Section 4011985(a)(2) is revised as follows: “A thorough review of the specific sections of the 41curriculum frameworks that pertain to EL pupils, academic content standards, and ELD 42standards[.]” 43 44Comment #26: Regarding page 16, line 16-17, we recommend the following: Change: 45“Current and confirmed scientific research as defined in Education Code section 4644757.5(j) related to instructing EL pupils because it provides Education Code definition 47of research.

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 21 of 50 4 5 1Response: The language for this section and all others pertaining to “scientifically 2based research” is revised as follows: “current and confirmed scientific research.” 3 4Comment #27: Regarding page 16, lines 19-20, we recommend the following: Add: 5“standardized tests, curriculum-embedded assessments, the STAR system, CELDT, 6Just omissions –both need to be included. 7Response: Education Code section 99237.5(b)(5) requires that instruction be included 8pertaining to analyzing and discussing multiple assessments. Section 11985(a)(4) is 9revised as follows: “Readings and discussions of other pertinent materials related to the 10language and literacy of EL pupils which address the value of the diagnostic nature of 11standardized tests, the STAR system, the CELDT, curriculum embedded assessments, 12and the CAHSEE[.]” 13 14Comment #28: Regarding page 16, lines 21-24, we recommend the following: Change: 15“(5) Components of ELD in state board adopted instructional materials; and delete: 16“Essential” because it provides the actual language in Education Code section 1799237.5(4)(B) and deletes language that is beyond scope of Education Code. 18 19Response: The SB 472 ELPD Advisory Committee strongly recommended this section 20be included in the content of the training. Section 11985(a)(5) is revised as follows: 21“Essential components of a comprehensive program of ELD that includes actively 22developing all domains of language, addressing various levels of English proficiency 23and academic English, while creating a supportive learning environment for language 24learning.” 25 26Comment #29: Regarding page 16, lines 25-26, we recommend the following: “(b) 27Instruction designed to meet the academic instructional needs of EL pupils that 28emphasize the following: Delete: “ELD” because it matches authorizing section 2999237.5(a)(1). 30 31Response: Education Code section 99237.5(b)(6)(7)(8) requires that the training 32include instruction on the elements outlined in Section 11985(b). In addition, Education 33Code section 99237.5(b)(9) allows the training to include, “Any additional instruction and 34training areas that may be considered to improve pupil learning and achievement based 35upon the needs of participating teachers.” The SB 472 ELPD Advisory Committee 36recommended the 40 hour follow-up training have three essential components: 37foundational knowledge, ELD instruction, and reading/language arts and content area 38instruction. Section 11985(b) outlines each element of the ELD component. Section 3911985(b) is revised as follows: “ELD instruction designed to meet the language and 40academic, instructional needs of EL pupils.…” 41 42Comment #30: Regarding page 16, lines 27-32, we recommend the following: Delete: 43All (1) – (3) because it attempts to separate learning into two categories: ELD as 44language study separate from content study.

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 22 of 50 4 5 1Response: Training teachers on deepening connections of ELD study with content 2study will be an emphasis of the new EL professional development. The SB 472 ELPD 3Advisory Committee strongly recommended this section be included in the content of 4the training. 5 6Comment #31: Regarding page 17, lines 1-13, we recommend the following: Delete: All 7(4) – (5) and (c) because it is not the language of Education Code section 99237.5(b) 8(1)–(8). 9 10Response: Education Code section 99237.5(b)(6)(7)(8) requires the training include 11instruction on the elements outlined in Section 11985(b)(c). In addition, Education Code 12section 99237.5(b)(9) allows the training to include, “Any additional instruction and 13training areas that may be considered to improve pupil learning and achievement based 14upon the needs of participating teachers.” The SB 472 ELPD Advisory Committee 15recommended the 40 hour follow-up training have three essential components: 16foundational knowledge, ELD instruction, and reading/language arts and content area 17instruction. Section 11985(b) outlines each element of the ELD component. 18 19Comment #32: Regarding page 17, lines 14-23, we recommend the following: Delete: 20(1) – (6) because it is not the language of Education Code section 99237.5(b)(1)–(8). 21 22Response: Education Code section 99237.5(b)(6)(7)(8) requires the training include 23instruction on the elements outlined in Section 11985(b)(c). In addition, Education Code 24section 99237.5(b)(9) allows the training to include, “Any additional instruction and 25training areas that may be considered to improve pupil learning and achievement based 26upon the needs of participating teachers.” The SB 472 EL PD Advisory Committee 27recommended the 40 hour follow-up training have three essential components: 28foundational knowledge, ELD instruction, and reading/language arts and content area 29instruction. Section 11985(b) outlines each element of the ELD component. 30 31Comment #33: Regarding page 16, lines 1-23, we recommend the following: Insert the 32language in Education Code section 99237.5 (c) (1) – (8) because it provides 33understandable content for training curriculum and matches the authorizing Education 34Code section. 35 36 1. Vocabulary development; 3837 2. Writing development; 4039 3. Core academic standards and English Language Development Standards; 4241 4. Comprehensive instructional strategies using state board adopted instructional 43 materials, including the universal access components of the state board adopted 44 programs; 4645 5. Analyzing achievement of English learners to improve pupil performance through 47 the use of multiple measures including state and local pupil assessment 48 instructions and the Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program;

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 23 of 50 4 5 1 6. English Language Development targeted to the pupil’s English language 2 proficiency level as measured by the California English Language Development 3 Test; 54 7. Early intervention techniques for pupils experiencing difficulty; and 76 8. Instructional strategies to teach essential content to address the varied learning 8 needs of English learner pupils, including the different proficiency levels of 9 English language learner pupils as determined by the California English 10 Language Development Test. 11 12Response: Education Code is generally not to be restated in regulations. The 13professional development will include legislated requirements under Education Code 14section 99237.5 and requirements included in Section 11985. Education Code section 1599237.5(b)(9) allows the training to include, “Any additional instruction and training 16areas that may be considered to improve pupil learning and achievement based upon 17the needs of participating teachers.” The SB 472 ELPD Advisory Committee 18recommended the 40 hour follow-up training have three essential components: 19foundational knowledge, ELD instruction, and reading/language arts and content area 20instruction. Section 11985(a) outlines each element of foundational knowledge 21component,(b) outlines each element of the ELD component, and (c) outlines each 22element of the reading/language arts and content area instruction component. 23 24Comment #34: Regarding 11985.5, page 18, lines 2-3, we recommend the following: 25Change: “consisting of at least two qualified reviewers . . .” because it is important to 26have consistency in the application of judgments of compliance with curriculum training 27requirements for 5-day training; and this was a requirement for AB 466 reviews. 28 29Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. The review panel for the initial 30training and the English learner training will now consist of two or more reviewers. 31 32Comment #35: Regarding page 18, line 7, we recommend the following: Add: “(1) 33mathematics and English/language arts content standards” because it reinforces that 34these are the two academic content standards for the purpose of these Administrative 35Regulations. 36 37Response: Section 11985.5(b)(1)(2) requires a qualified reviewer to “have knowledge 38of information related to mathematics or reading as applicable, including: (1) Academic 39content standards; (2) Curriculum frameworks.” The reference to mathematics and 40English/language arts content standards is already included in these regulations. 41 42Comment #36: Regarding page 18, line 8, we recommend the following: Add: “(2) 43mathematics and reading/language arts curriculum frameworks” because it reinforces 44that these are the two specific curriculum frameworks for the purpose of these 45Administrative Regulations. 46 47Response: Section 11985.5(b)(1)(2) requires a qualified reviewer to “have knowledge 48of information related to mathematics or reading as applicable, including: (1) Academic

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 24 of 50 4 5 1content standards; (2) Curriculum frameworks.” The reference to mathematics and 2English/language arts content standards is already included in these regulations. 3 4Comment #37: Regarding page 18, line 11, we recommend the following: Add: “(4) 5Current and confirmed scientific research as defined in Education Code section 644757.5(j)” because it provides Ed. Code definition of research. 7 8Response: The language for this section and all others pertaining to “scientifically 9based research” is revised as follows: “current and confirmed scientific research.” 10 11Comment #38: Regarding page 18, line 13, we recommend the following: Edit: lower 12case for certified s supplemental materials because it is not an official title. 13 14Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Any reference to certified 15supplemental materials will be in lower case. 16 17Comment #39: Regarding page 18, lines 14-15, we recommend the following: 18Change/Add: “(5) Linkage between assessment and curriculum with the use of 19standardized tests, curriculum-embedded tests, the STAR system, CELDT, and 20CAHSEE for diagnostic information related to EL pupils” because it provides 21consistency of reference to relevant assessments related to EL pupils throughout these 22Administrative Regulations. 23 24Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Section 11985.5(b)(6) is revised as 25follows: “Linkage between curriculum and assessment with the use of standardized 26tests, curriculum-embedded assessments, the STAR system, CELDT, and CAHSEE for 27diagnostic information related to EL pupils.” 28 29Comment #40: Regarding page 18, lines 18-32, we recommend the following: Delete 30all (1) – (6) and add language from Education Code 99237.5 (c) (1) – (8) because it 31provides understandable content for training curriculum and matches the authorizing 32Education Code section. 33 34 1. Knowledge and understanding of vocabulary development; 3635 2. Knowledge and understanding of writing development; 3837 3. Knowledge and understanding of core academic standards and English 39 Language Development Standards; 4140 4. Knowledge and understanding of comprehensive instructional strategies using 42 state board adopted instructional materials, including the universal access 43 components of the state board adopted programs; 4544 5. Knowledge and understanding how to analyze achievement of English learners 46 to improve pupil performance through the use of multiple measures including 47 state and local pupil assessment instructions and the Standardized Testing and 48 Reporting (STAR) Program;

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 25 of 50 4 5 1 6. Knowledge and understanding of English Language Development for targeting 2 instruction at the pupil’s English language proficiency level as measured by the 3 California English Language Development Test; 54 7. Knowledge and understanding of early intervention techniques for pupils 6 experiencing difficulty; and 87 8. Knowledge and instruction of instructional strategies to teach essential content to 9 address the varied learning needs of English learner pupils, including the 10 different proficiency levels of English language learner pupils as determined by 11 the California English Language Development Test. 12 13Response: Education Code is generally not to be restated in regulations. The 14professional development will include legislated requirements under section 99237.5 15and requirements included in section 11985. Education Code section 99237.5(b)(9) 16allows the training to include, “Any additional instruction and training areas that may be 17considered to improve pupil learning and achievement based upon the needs of 18participating teachers.” The SB 472 ELPD Advisory Committee recommended the 40 19hour follow-up training have three essential components: foundational knowledge, ELD 20instruction, and reading/language arts and content area instruction. Section 11985(a) 21outlines each element of foundational knowledge component,(b) outlines each element 22of the ELD component, and (c) outlines each element of the reading/language arts and 23content area instruction component. 24 25Comment #41: Regarding page 18, line 24, we recommend the following: Add/Modify 26(3): Knowledge and understanding of current and confirmed scientific research as 27defined in Education Code section 44757.5(j) related to the instructional practices for 28mathematics or reading/language arts as related to EL pupils because it offers a 29consistent outcome identified consistently in the Administrative Regulations. 30 31Response: This recommendation is accepted in part. The language for this section and 32all others pertaining to “scientifically based research” is revised as follows: “current and 33confirmed scientific research.” 34 35Comment #42: Regarding page 19, lines 1-13, we recommend the following: Delete (6) 36– (11) because it does not match and goes beyond the requirements for training 37curriculum content authorized in Education Code sections 99237.5(a)(4)(A)-(D) and 3899237.5(b)(1)-(8). 39 40Response: Section 11985.5, lines 1-13, outlines a part of the requirements to be a 41qualified review of the EL professional development. The SB 472 ELPD Advisory 42Committee strongly recommended the requirements included in this section. 43 44Comment #45: Regarding section 11985.6, page 20, lines 26-28, we recommend the 45following: Change: “(A) Thirty percent for presentation and direct instruction on current 46and confirmed research as defined by Education Code section 44757.5(j), mathematics 47and English/language arts content standards and ELD Standards, and state board 48adopted K-8 or local board 9-12 adopted core and ancillary EL support materials;”

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 26 of 50 4 5 1because Education Code section 99237.5 does not reference EL theoretical framework 2content; and there is no approved, adopted framework among voluminous known 3frameworks. 4 5Response: Based on this and other public comment recommendations, Section 611985.6(a)(8)(A) is revised as follows: “Thirty percent for presentation and direct 7instruction of current and confirmed scientific research as related to the effective 8instruction of English learners, including the use of level of language proficiency and the 9ELD standards to scaffold instruction, allowing access to core, grade-level content area 10instruction.” 11 12Comment #46: Regarding page 21, lines 29-32, we recommend the following: Change: 13“(B) Forty percent for demonstrations and modeling of key routines to illustrate 14instructional strategies that include whole and small group differentiated instruction by 15English language proficiency levels to ensure EL pupils’ mastery of mathematics and 16English/language arts content standards and ELD Standards, and academic language” 17and Delete: lines 30-32 because forty percent for demonstrations and modeling on how 18to differentiate instruction to meet the needs of English learners is needed. 19 20Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Section 11985.6(a)(8)(B) is revised 21as follows: “Forty percent for demonstrations and modeling of key routines to illustrate 22instructional strategies that include whole and small group differentiated instruction by 23English language proficiency levels to ensure EL pupils’ mastery of mathematics and 24English/language arts content standards, ELD standards, and academic language 25proficiency.” 26 27Comment #47: Regarding page 21, lines 1-3, we recommend the following: Change: 28“(C) Thirty percent to adjust for change on page 20. 29 30Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Section 11985.6(a)(8)(C) is revised 31as follows: “Thirty percent for practice.…” 32 33Comment #48: Regarding page 21, line 22, we recommend the following: Edit: lower 34case for certified supplemental materials because it is not an official title. 35 36Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Any reference to certified 37supplemental materials will be in lower case as it is not an official title. 38 39Comment #49: Regarding page 22, line 9, we recommend the following: Change: “at 40least two qualified reviewers” because it is important to have consistency in the 41application of judgments of compliance with curriculum training requirements for 5-day 42training; and this was a requirement for AB 466 reviews. 43 44Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. The review panel for the initial 45training and the English learner training will now consist of two or more reviewers.

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 27 of 50 4 5 1Comment #50: Regarding page 22, lines 16, we recommend the following: Add: “(1) 2mathematics and English/language arts content standards” because it reinforces that 3these are the two academic content standards for the purpose of these Administrative 4Regulations. 5 6Response: Section 11985.6(b)(1)(2) requires a qualified reviewer to “have knowledge 7of information related to mathematics or reading as applicable, including: (1) Academic 8content standards; (2) Curriculum frameworks.” The reference to mathematics and 9English/language arts content standards is already included in these regulations. 10 11Comment #51: Regarding page 22, line 17, we recommend the following: Add: “(2) 12mathematics and reading/language arts curriculum frameworks” because it reinforces 13that these are the two specific curriculum frameworks for the purpose of these 14Administrative Regulations. 15 16Response: Section 11985.6(b)(1)(2) requires a qualified reviewer to “have knowledge 17of information related to mathematics or reading as applicable, including: (1) Academic 18content standards; (2) Curriculum frameworks.” The reference to mathematics and 19English/language arts content standards is already included in these regulations. 20 21Comment #52: Regarding page 22, line 22, we recommend the following: Edit: lower 22case for certified supplemental materials because it is not an official title. 23 24Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Any reference to certified 25supplemental materials will be in lower case as it is not an official title. 26 27Comment #53: Regarding page 22, line 23, we recommend the following: Change/Add: 28“(5) Linkage between assessment and curriculum with the use of standardized tests, 29curriculum-embedded tests, the STAR system, CELDT, and CAHSEE for diagnostic 30information related to EL pupils” because it provides consistency of reference to 31relevant assessments related to EL pupils throughout these Administrative Regulations. 32 33Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Section 11985.6(b)(6) is revised as 34follows: “Linkage between curriculum and assessment with the use of standardized 35tests, curriculum-embedded assessments, the STAR system, CELDT, and CAHSEE for 36diagnostic information related to EL pupils.” 37 38 Martha Hernandez, Director of Curriculum, Instruction and Continuous 39 Improvement, Ventura County Office of Education, in an e-mail dated May 25, 40 2007, submitted twelve comments: 41 42Comment #1: Regarding Section 11985.6, page 18, line 32, SB 472 was amended to 43include, among other provisions, professional development specific to ELL's for 44teachers instructing these students, within the 40 of the 80 follow up hours. It is critical 45therefore that the providers who will be training the trainers have expertise and 46experience in developing and providing this type of professional development. The 47proposed regulations do not ensure that the training providers possess the knowledge

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 28 of 50 4 5 1and experience in developing and implementing a successful training program specific 2to English learners. Therefore, it is recommended that a new subdivision (a) be 3inserted: 4"Evidence of providing EL professional development that addresses teaching in multi- 5subject, self-contained classrooms or discipline specific classrooms, linguistically and 6culturally diverse student population with attention to all four domains of language 7specific to the development of language and literacy for English learners." 8 9The lettering of the subsequent subdivisions will need to change as well. 10 11Response: Education Code section 99237.5(a)(A-D) outlines the quality standards that 12providers of the must possess to be considered as SB 472 English Learner professional 13development providers. The criteria and provisions included in Sections 11985 through 14and 11985.6 include sufficient requirements to ensure that teachers are being trained by 15providers who have the knowledge and experience to carry out the requirements under 16Education Code section 99237, specifically that the training be “designed to help all 17pupils gain mastery of the California academic content standards with special emphasis 18on English language learners and pupils with exceptional needs.” 19 20Comment #2: Regarding Sections 11985.5(b), page 18, and 11985.6 (b), page 22, it is 21recommended that a call for the establishment of a review panel be comprised of one or 22more reviewers designated by the SBE for the purpose or reviewing and approving the 23training providers and the training curriculum. The SB 472 Advisory Committee is 24comprised of individuals representing a broad spectrum of disciplines and possessing 25the knowledge, expertise and skills necessary to perform the important responsibilities 26of approving or disapproving a training curriculum and training providers. Why reinvent 27the wheel when a capable cadre of individuals is already available to do these important 28activities. It is recommended that the SBE utilize the SB 472 Advisory Committee 29instead of the review panels. 30 31Response: The first part of this recommendation is accepted as is. The review panel for 32the initial training and the English learner training will now consist of two or more 33reviewers. The second part of this recommendation is not accepted. Although it is 34anticipated that members of the Advisory Committee will also function as reviewers on 35the ELPD review panel, other qualified individuals will also be appointed to function in 36this capacity. 37 38Comment #3: Regarding Section 11985(a)(4) Training Curriculum for English Learner 39Professional Development, page 16, lines 18-20, it is recommended that language be 40inserted that includes other types of significant assessments. Inclusion of other types of 41assessments, in addition to standardized tests, is important and necessary in order to 42be better able to understand and utilize all assessments administered to ELL students. 43The following language is recommended: "(4) Readings and discussions of other 44pertinent materials related to EL pupils which address the value of the diagnostic nature 45of language and literacy, multiple measures both formative and summative 46assessments, including but not limited to, the CELDT, standardized tests, the STAR 47system and the CAHSEE; and."

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 29 of 50 4 5 1Response: Education Code section 99237.5(b)(5) requires that instruction be included 2pertaining to analyzing and discussing multiple assessments. Section 11985(a)(4) is 3revised as follows: “Readings and discussions of other pertinent materials related to the 4language and literacy of EL pupils which address the value of the diagnostic nature of 5standardized tests, the STAR system, the CELDT, curriculum embedded assessments, 6and the CAHSEE[.]” 7 8Comment #4: Regarding Section 11985(b), page 16, line 25 the insertion of the word 9"language" would ensure that both English language acquisition and literacy needs are 10being addressed for students who are English learners. Therefore the following revision 11is recommended: "(b) ELD instruction designed to meet the language and academic 12instructional needs of EL pupils, that emphasizes the following....” 13 14Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Section 11985(b) is revised as 15follows: "ELD instruction designed to meet the language and academic instructional 16needs of EL pupils, which emphasizes the following....” 17 18Comment #5: Regarding Section 11985(d)(1), page 17, line 13, the insertion of new 19language ensures that all four areas critical to English acquisition and literacy are 20developed, not just vocabulary and writing development as proposed. Therefore the 21following revision is recommended: "Knowledge of reading/language arts instruction to 22support EL pupils in oral language development, vocabulary development and writing 23development." 24 25Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Section 11985(d)(1) is revised as 26follows: "Knowledge of reading/language arts instruction to support EL pupils in oral 27language development, vocabulary development, and writing development." 28 29Comment #6: Regarding Section 11985.5(c)(3), Curriculum Review of English Learner 30Professional Development, page 18, line 25, the following recommendation would 31ensure that the training curriculum to be used by providers of teachers of ELL students 32will also have knowledge of English language development. This is equally important in 33light of the fact that you will have teachers instructing ELL students with no or very little 34knowledge of English. It is recommended that the subdivision be revised to read: "(3) 35Knowledge and understanding of current EL research with regard to teaching 36mathematics, language arts and English language development". 37 38Response: This recommendation is accepted. Section 11985.5(c)(3). Section 3911985.5(c)(5) is deleted. Section 11985.5(c)(3) is revised as follows: “Knowledge and 40understanding of current and confirmed scientific EL research with regard to teaching 41mathematics or reading/language arts and English language development, including 42how to apply this research to classroom practice to increase student learning and 43language acquisition[.]” 44 45Comment #7: Regarding Section 11985.5(c)(7), page 19, lines 2-5, it is recommended 46that this subdivision be deleted and re-letter subsequent subdivisions. This section is

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 30 of 50 4 5 1specific to the "40 follow up" hours of ELL professional development. The content of the 2proposed subdivision (c)(7) is the content that should be contained in the first/initial 40 3hours or the other 40 hours of follow up. The 40 hours specific to ELL professional 4development will barely provide the time or content specific to ELL instruction. 5 6Response: The intent of the ELPD is to deepen the knowledge and application of the 7initial forty hour SB 472 training. Providing context during the ELPD training with respect 8to the frameworks is essential. Section 11985.5(c)(7) is renumbered to Section 911985.5(c)(6) and will not be deleted. However, it is revised as follows: “Knowledge and 10understanding of how to teach the ELD components of the SBE adopted instructional 11materials for kindergarten through grade eight or standards-aligned instructional 12materials for grades nine through twelve[.]” 13 14Comment #8: Regarding Section 11985.5(e), page 19, line 24 and 11985.6(d), page 1523, line 3, it is recommended that language be inserted in subdivision (e) that would 16require the panel to also provide to the State Board of Education (SBE) the reason(s) 17for their recommendation of approval or disapproval of a curriculum. Insert language 18that would require the SBE to forward a written letter to those entities whose curriculum 19was disapproved and the reason(s) for disapproval. Requiring the submission of why a 20curriculum was disapproved or approved is good public policy and provides for 21important transparency to the process. 22 23Comment #10: Regarding Section 11984.5, Curriculum Review of the Initial Forty 24Hours, page 12, line 17, it is recommended that language be inserted in subdivision (e) 25that would require the panel to also provide to the SBE the reason(s) for their 26recommendation of approval or disapproval of a curriculum. It is also recommended that 27language be inserted that would require the SBE to forward a written letter to those 28entities whose curriculum was disapproved and the reason(s) for disapproval. Requiring 29the submission of why a curriculum was disapproved or approved is good public policy 30and provides for important transparency to the process. 31 32Comment #12: Regarding Section 11984.6, Training Providers of the Initial Forty 33Hours, page 14, line 8, the same recommendation is made with respect to inserting 34language requiring the reason(s) for disapproving or approving a prospective provider’s 35written proposal as well as providing a written letter stating the reasons for disapproval 36to rejected providers. 37 38Response to Comments #8, 10, and 12: Sections 11984.5(e) and 11985.5(e) 39regarding the review panel’s recommendation for approval or disapproval of a 40prospective provider’s curriculum is substantially revised as follows: “If the review panel 41determines that the prospective provider’s curriculum does not meet the requirements of 42this section based on documented findings, the review panel shall confer with the 43prospective provider to correct deficiencies for resubmission. The review panel shall 44confer with the prospective provider on as many occasions as the review panel deems 45productive. Thereafter, if the prospective provider’s curriculum is deemed to meet the 46requirements of this section based on documented findings, the review panel shall 47recommend to the SBE that the prospective provider’s curriculum be approved.”

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 31 of 50 4 5 1Sections 11984.6(d) and 11985.6(d) regarding the review panel’s recommendation for 2approval or disapproval of a prospective provider’s written proposal is substantially 3revised as follows: “If the review panel determines that the prospective provider’s written 4proposal does not meet the requirements of this section based on documented findings, 5the review panel shall confer with the prospective provider to correct deficiencies for 6resubmission. The review panel shall confer with the prospective provider on as many 7occasions as the review panel deems productive. Thereafter, if the prospective 8provider’s written proposal is deemed to meet the requirements of this section based on 9documented findings, the review panel shall recommend to the SBE that the 10prospective provider be approved as a provider.” 11 12Comment #9: Regarding Section 11983, page 8, line 9, Education Code section 1399237(a)(3)(A)(B) refers to English Language arts and not “reading/language” as 14proposed. 15 16Response: Section 11983(b) is revised as follows: “An LEA participating in the program 17must provide each pupil with currently adopted instructional materials that are aligned to 18the state content standards in English/language arts in accordance with Education Code 19section 99237(a)(3)(A) and (B).” 20 21Comment #11: Regarding Section 11984.6, Training Providers of the Initial Forty 22Hours, page 14, line 8, requiring a prospective provider's experience and qualifications 23regarding training curriculum for special education students or students who are English 24learners should be required not permissive, as is currently proposed. These are two 25student sub-groups requiring special attention on reading/language arts skills therefore 26prospective trainers should demonstrate their experience and qualifications in the 27delivery of a training curriculum to these students. It is recommended to delete the 28words "may include" and insert "including." 29 30Response: The criteria and provisions included in Sections 11984 through and 11984.6 31include sufficient requirements to ensure that teachers are being trained by providers 32who have the knowledge and experience to carry out the requirements under Education 33Code section 99237, specifically that the training be “designed to help all pupils gain 34mastery of the California academic content standards with special emphasis on English 35language learners and pupils with exceptional needs.” 36 37 Sandra Ceja, Director, Reading First, Regional Technical Assistance and 38 Reading Implementation Centers, San Diego County Office of Education, in an e- 39 mail dated May 25, 2007, submitted twenty-eight comments: 40 41Comment #1: Regarding Section 11985 Training Curriculum for English Learner 42Professional Development, overall, this section has a lot of redundancy and isn’t very 43clear. It appears that there are three main sections: 44 45 1. The first section sets the common resources (standards, frameworks, 46 assessments, instructional materials) that will be used and embedded into the 47 training.

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 32 of 50 4 5 1 2. The second component specifically addresses effective instruction to provide 2 equitable access to grade-level content area instruction, in Reading/Language 3 Arts or Mathematics, including effective use of the Universal Access components 4 as well as planning and delivering core instruction lessons. 65 3. The third component addresses the understanding of specific language 7 instruction for EL’s, including levels of language proficiency, analysis of student 8 work, effective instruction to promote language acquisition, and use of the most 9 current research and approved instructional materials. 10 11Comment #2: The 40-hour ELPD training should build upon and extend from the initial 1240-hour SB472 training, and include the following core components: 13 14 1. Standards: Academic content standards and English Language development 15 standards, with an emphasis on how they interrelate across the four domains of 16 listening, speaking reading and writing to simultaneously allow for equitable 17 access to grade level content and develop language proficiency. 1918 2. Frameworks: Current curriculum frameworks, with particular emphasis on the 20 Universal Access components and sections that highlight the unique needs of 21 English Learners. 2322 3. Research: Current, scientifically-based research related to effective instructional 24 practices to provide equitable access for English Learners to content, using the 25 SBE approved instructional materials and to provide English Language 26 Development that will support EL’s in achieving proficiency in English in the most 27 effective and efficient manner possible. 2928 4. Assessment: Use of standardized assessment data, including the CELDT, CST, 30 CAHSEE and other STAR assessment components, to monitor and assure the 31 progress of English Learners to reach proficiency in English and grade level 32 content. 33 34Comment #3: The 40-hour ELPD training should build upon and extend from the initial 3540-hour SB472 training to support English Learners in accessing core, content area 36instruction using SBE approved curriculum: 37 38 1. Effective use of the Universal Access components of the SBE approved 39 instructional programs designed to provide English Learner access to core, 40 content area instruction. 4241 2. Deepen and extend the content knowledge of participants to identify and 43 efficiently teach the linguistic structures embedded in the SBE approved 44 instructional programs. This would include a thorough review of linguistic 45 features, with emphasis on contrastive analysis that leads to the transfer of skills 46 from one language to another. 4847 3. Effective instructional strategies to support comprehension and access to content 49 area instruction, including text and lesson analysis for language and content. 50 Participants would learn and practice planning lessons to address and support 51 the needs of students at various levels of English proficiency.

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 33 of 50 4 5 1 4. Analysis of oral and written language production of English Learners to inform 2 and design effective instruction. 3 4Comment #4: The 40-hour ELPD training should build upon and extend from the initial 540-hour SB472 training to support English Learners in reaching English Language 6proficiency in the most efficient manner, including: 7 8 1. A thorough understanding of the different levels of English Language proficiency 9 and how to plan instruction that is designed to promote advancement from each 10 level. 1211 2. Current, scientifically-based research related to the effective instruction of 13 second-language learners. 1514 3. Strategies to use the Certified Supplemental Materials for English Learners as 16 tools for ELD instruction. Effective use of ELD materials that are aligned to the 17 core curriculum in several program options in subsequent adoptions, as defined 18 in the criteria in the new Reading/Language Arts Framework. 2019 4. Development of vocabulary and language for purposeful oral and written 21 communication that emphasizes structured opportunities for practice. 22 23Response to Comments #1-4: Education Code section 99237.5 and Sections 11985- 2411985.6 included in the regulations outline the content of the training and requirements 25for training providers’ proposal. These four comments capture the essence of the 40 26hours English Learner Professional Development. 27 28Comment #5: Regarding Section 11985 New (a), page 16, lines 5-6, “Foundational 29knowledge specifically designed to assist EL pupils to attain.…” This use of 30“foundational knowledge” is not clear or specifically defined and could be interpreted in 31a variety of ways. It is also unclear how such “foundational knowledge” could be 32“designed to assist EL pupils.…” There is current, reliable research that is available 33regarding the instruction of EL’s, including the recent EdSource document, the National 34Literacy Panel work, the Center for Instruction document (Research-based Principles for 35Teaching EL’s), and even some pieces in a recent Elementary School Journal 36publication. A bibliography or glossary to define terms would be needed if there is such 37defined “foundational knowledge that is aligned to current, reliable research.” 38 39Response: The term “Foundational Knowledge” was coined by the SB 472 ELPD 40Advisory Committee and is defined in section 11985(a). The criteria of this component is 41included in Section 11985(a)(1-5). 42 43Comment #6: Regarding Section 11985 New (a), Part (2), page 16, lines 14-15, “A 44thorough review of the curriculum frameworks, academic content standards and ELD 45standards relevant to instructing EL pupils” The framework and the standards are 46relevant for ALL students. Better language may be: A thorough review of the academic 47content and ELD standards and current curriculum frameworks, with particular 48emphasis on specific sections which address the specialized needs of English Learners 49to provide equitable access to grade level standards and approved curriculum.

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 34 of 50 4 5 1Response: This recommendation is accepted in part. Section 11985(a)(2) is revised as 2follows: “A thorough review of the specific sections of the curriculum frameworks that 3pertain to EL pupils, academic content standards, and ELD standards.” 4 5Comment #7: Regarding Section 11985 New (a), Part (2), page 16, lines 16-17, the 6Education Code clearly defines “scientifically based research” and perhaps the word 7current should be inserted (Current, scientifically-based research”) and an approved list 8of research should be cited relative to instruction of English Learners. There is too much 9margin for interpretation. 10 11Response: The language for this section and all others pertaining to “scientifically 12based research” is revised as follows: “current and confirmed scientific research.” 13 14Comment #8: Regarding Section 11985 New (a), Part (4), page 16, lines 18-20, 15perhaps CELDT is implied in the STAR system, but it might be valuable to list it 16individually, particularly because the initial 40-hour training does not require a review of 17CELDT. 18 19Response: Education Code section 99237.5(b)(5) requires that instruction be included 20pertaining to analyzing and discussing multiple assessments. Section 11985(a)(4) is 21revised as follows: “Readings and discussions of other pertinent materials related to the 22language and literacy of EL pupils which address the value of the diagnostic nature of 23standardized tests, the STAR system, the CELDT, curriculum embedded assessments, 24and the CAHSEE[.]” 25 26Comment #9: Regarding Section 11985 New (a), Part (5), page 16, lines 21-24, line 23 27uses “English fluency” which could be confused or misinterpreted with reading fluency 28and correct/common language uses the word, proficiency. Better language:” addressing 29the various levels of English proficiency.” 30 31Response: This recommendation is accepted. Section 11985(a)(5) is revised as 32follows: “Essential components of a comprehensive program of ELD that include 33actively developing all domains of language, addressing various level of English 34proficiency and academic English, while creating a supportive learning environment for 35language learning.” 36 37Comment #10: Regarding Section 11985 New (b), Page 16, lines 25-26, a comma is 38needed “ELD instruction designed to meet the academic, instructional needs of EL 39pupils….” 40 41Response: SBE does not believe a comma is needed, particularly in light of newly 42added language. 43 44Comment #11: Regarding Section 11985 New (b), Part (1), page 16, lines 27-29, the 45components of the various programs that were designed to support English learners are 46generally not collided components, but are identified as Universal Access components 47for English Learners. These components are not designed to help teachers understand 48ELD content, but to help them more effectively teach English Learners.

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 35 of 50 4 5 1The new Reading/Language Arts/English Language Development Framework Criteria 2for programs will include ELD for some of the program options. Use of English 3Language Development materials (currently supplemental and aligned to core in the 4future) is addressed in subsequent sections. Better language: Effective use of the ELD 5Universal Access components of the SBE adopted instructional materials for 6kindergarten through grade eight specifically designed to help teachers of EL pupils 7understand ELD content effectively teach English Learners. 8 9Response: Education Code section 99237.5 (b)(4) requires that the training include, 10“Comprehensive instructional strategies using state board adopted instructional 11materials, including the universal access components of the state board adopted 12programs.” This portion of the statute already makes clear the use of the universal 13access components and does not need to be added to these regulations. 14 15Comment #12: Regarding Section 11985 New (b), Part (2), page 16, lines 30-31, the 16research needs to be current, the word “findings” is unnecessary, and instructional 17practices are not for “learning” but to support the learner, or to support effective 18instruction. Better language: “Current scientifically-based research findings related to 19the instructional practices for effective instruction of second language learners.” 20 21Response: This recommendation is accepted in part. The language for this section and 22all others pertaining to “scientifically based research” is revised as follows: “current and 23confirmed scientific research.” 24 25Comment #13: Regarding Section 11985 New (b), Part (3), page 16-17, lines 32-1, we 26need teachers to know how to plan and deliver effective instruction for English Learners. 27Better language: “A thorough understanding of levels of English language proficiency 28and how to plan and deliver instruction for each level.” 29 30Response: Education Code section 99237.5(a)(4)(D) requires the following: “It shall be 31capable of delivering a thorough knowledge of the core academic content standards 32using the English language development standards to deliver instruction, as applicable.” 33Coupled with the criteria included in Section 11985, the requested recommendation is 34extensively included in the training criteria. 35 36Comment #14: Regarding Section 11985 New (b), Part (4), page 18, lines 2-3, the 37legislation states that the provider should include strategies for using the materials. 38Each district has different materials and has allotted a different amount of time for 39supplemental ELD. The language should also include something about the framework 40program options for the new adoptions which include aligned ELD. Once those are 41available, we would want specific support for teachers in planning and using them. 42“Strategies to effectively and efficiently use Certified Supplemental Materials for English 43Learners as tools for ELD instruction.” 44 45Response: Education Code section 99237.5 (a)(4)(C) requires the following: “It shall 46include strategies to use supplementary materials with the state board adopted program 47to meet the needs of English language learner pupils.” Meeting the instructional needs

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 36 of 50 4 5 1of ELLs in language and literacy is the primary purpose for including the supplementary 2materials in the statute. Section 11985(b)(4) is revised as follows: “The planning of ELD 3instruction to effectively and efficiently use ELD standards and certified supplemental 4materials for English learners as tools for ELD instruction[.]” 5 6Comment #15: Section 11985 New (d), Part (4), lines 19-20 is worded awkwardly and 7doesn’t make sense as written. “Effective comprehension and instructional strategies to 8teach essential content” Better wording: Instructional strategies to improve 9comprehension and access to core content. 10 11Response: Section 11985(d)(4) has been deleted. Education Code section 99237.5(a) 12(4)(A) already includes this provision and states the training “shall be sufficient in scope, 13depth, and duration to fully equip teachers with comprehensive instructional strategies 14using state board adopted instructional materials, including the universal access 15components of the state board adopted programs.” 16 17Comment #16: Regarding Section 11985.5(b), page18, lines 4-5, we can’t afford to 18have reviewers that only have “knowledge of information related to math or reading, 19they need to “To be a qualified reviewer, a reviewer shall have experience teaching EL 20pupils and have knowledge of information related to teaching mathematics or reading, 21as applicable.…” 22 23Response: Section 11985.5(b)(1-6) references the extensive qualification to be a 24reviewer of the ELPD program. As part of the selection process, the review panel 25applicant will be required to provide evidence that the applicant has the requisite 26knowledge to be a qualified reviewer. This section will not be revised. 27 28Comment #17: Regarding Section 11985.6(a), Part (8) Section (A), as it currently 29reads: “Thirty percent for presentation and direct instruction of EL theoretical framework, 30research, and academic content standards while using ELD standards to deliver 31instruction.” This first content objective should be based on supporting EL access to 32core, grade-level, content-area instruction. As it reads, the state would need to define 33what the theoretical framework for teaching English learners is. There is current 34research, which should inform instruction for English Learners. Knowledge of the ELD 35standards and levels of proficiency should be used to scaffold instruction. 36 37Better language: Thirty percent for presentation and direct instruction of current 38research as related to the effective instruction of English Learners, including the use of 39levels of language proficiency and the ELD standards to scaffold instruction, allowing 40access to core, grade-level content area instruction. 41 42Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Section 11985.6(a)(8)(A) is revised 43as follows: “Thirty percent for presentation and direct instruction of current and 44confirmed research as related to the effective instruction of English learners, including 45the use of levels of language proficiency and the ELD standards to scaffold instruction, 46allowing access to core, grade-level content area instruction.”

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 37 of 50 4 5 1Comment #18: Regarding Section 11981(a), page 1, lines 23-30, Funding Allocation, 2the previous legislation clarified that any district that was not fully reimbursed for training 3provided during one fiscal year, would be first eligible for reimbursement in the 4subsequent year. This is not clear in the proposed regulations for funding. It puts 5districts in a difficult position when they would like to have all of their teachers trained to 6not be sure if they will ever be reimbursed. 7 8This is good clarification to indicate that the funds should be used to improve the 9implementation of the curriculum through additional professional development 10 11Response: Funding under this statute is described in Education Code section 99234. 12 13Comment #19: Regarding Section 11982 (a), page 6, lines 7-11, Local Education 14Agencies’ Assurances of Compliance, “The professional development was delivered by 15a provider or providers approved….” While the requirement to use an approved provider 16is clearly in the law, striking this language may make it appear that an approved 17provider or providers is not required. With the upcoming adoption in language arts, the 18language may even need to be clarified by stating that a “currently approved provider” is 19required. 20 21Response: Education Code section 99237(a)(1) requires that, “an LEA submit a 22certified assurance signed by the appropriate agency official and approved in a public 23session by the governing body of the agency to the state board that it contracted with a 24provider whose training curriculum has been SBE approved. Both the provider and 25curriculum must be SBE approved. 26 27Comment #20: Regarding Section 11982 (b), page 6, lines 12-18, “The local 28educational agency (LEA) has or will have by the commencement of training, 29instructional materials…” While the requirement to use approved instructional materials 30is clearly in the law, striking this language may make it appear that any instructional 31materials are qualified. With the upcoming adoption in language arts, the language may 32even need to be clarified by stating that a “currently approved curriculum” is required. 33 34Response: Education Code section 99237(a)(3)(A) requires that an LEA “provide each 35pupil with instructional materials that are aligned to the state content standards in 36mathematics and English language arts no later than the first day of the first school term 37that commences 12 months or less after those materials are adopted by the state board 38in the case of instructional materials for kindergarten and grades 1 to 8, inclusive, or by 39the governing board of the school district in the case of instructional materials for grades 409 to 12, inclusive.” Once the new adoptions occur, the former adoptions are no longer 41considered to be SBE adopted instructional materials. LEAs will need to purchase the 42new SBE adopted instructional materials to be considered eligible for the training under 43this provision of law. 44 45Comment #21: Regarding Section 11983.5(b), page 9, Item 1, lines 5-6 Definition of 46Instructional Materials, “The instructional materials were purchased by the district prior 47to the 2002 Reading/Language Arts/English Language Development Adoption

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 38 of 50 4 5 1(RLA/ELD).” This section does not reference mathematics materials and also needs to 2emphasize currently adopted materials, as there are new programs coming into place 3before the professional development legislation ends. 4 5Response: It is anticipated that Section 11983.5 will be substantially revised and/or 6deleted once the adoptions in mathematics and language arts occur. Until that time, 7Section 11983.5 will remain as is in order to provide for those districts utilizing its 8provisions. 9 10Comment #22: Regarding Section 11984 (b), page 10, lines 10-11 Training Curriculum 11for the Initial Forty Hours, the word current needs to be inserted: “A thorough review of 12the current curriculum framework and academic content standards….” We need to 13emphasize the use of the newest framework versions. 14 15Comment #24: Regarding Section 11984.5 (b), page 11, Part (2), line 9 Curriculum 16Review of the Initial Forty Hours, the word current needs to be inserted: “Current 17curriculum frameworks.” We need to emphasize the use of the newest framework 18versions. 19 20Response to Comments #22 and 24: Whenever referenced, the curriculum 21frameworks and academic content standards always refer to the most current. 22 23Comment #23: Regarding Section (e) Part (2) line 20, Universal Access needs to be 24capitalized, as they are specific components of the framework criteria and the adopted 25programs. 26 27Response: These regulations as well as Education Code referenced in this program do 28not capitalize the term “universal access” even though they are specific components of 29the framework criteria and adopted programs. 30 31Comment #25: Regarding Section 11984.5 (c), page 11, Part (1), lines 20-21, providers 32should have knowledge of ALL of the mathematics or reading/language arts standards, 33because they co-articulate and build upon one another. They also need to be able to 34convey to the participants how to teach the standards, we are not assessing the 35provider’s ability to teach the standards. Better language: “Knowledge of all 36mathematics or reading/language arts standards and how to effectively teach such 37standards.” 38 39Response: Section 11984.5(b)(1-5) references the extensive qualification to be a 40reviewer of the initial training. As part of the selection process, the review panel 41applicant will be required to provide evidence that the applicant has the requisite 42knowledge to be a qualified reviewer. This section will not be revised. 43 44Comment #26: Regarding Section 11984.6 (a), page 13, Part (8), subdivision (A), lines 4521-23 Training Providers of the Initial Forty Hours, the language needs to clarify that the 46instruction needs to focus on the approved materials, including the Universal Access 47components. “Ancillary materials” is too open-ended. We have some publishers that 48have focused time and attention on additional products that they sell that are not part of 6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 39 of 50 4 5 1the approved curriculum and are not based on Scientifically Based Reading Research. 2Better language: “Thirty percent for presentation and direct instruction of academic 3content standards, curriculum framework, and approved instructional material’s core 4and ancillary components including Universal Access components.” 5 6Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Section 11984.6(a)(8)(A) is revised 7as follows: “Thirty percent for presentation and direct instruction of academic content 8standards, curriculum framework, and approved instructional material’s core and 9ancillary components including Universal Access components.” 10 11Comment #27: Regarding Section 11984.6 (a), page 14, Part (11), subdivision (A), 12lines 1-3, Training Providers of the Initial Forty Hours Providers should be directed to 13directly involve the LEA leadership in the planning and implementation of the institutes, 14but a provider cannot ensure attendance of any LEA staff, particularly when the 15participants have multiple, statewide opportunities to attend institutes. Better language 16may be: “A description of how it will collaborate with the LEA in planning and delivering 17the training which also ensures that the superintendent or his/her designee will be 18present during the training is informed about the training content and is prepared to 19support implementation.” 20 21Response: The SBE supports the recommendation of the SB 472 ELPD Advisory 22Committee that the presence of district leadership is critical to successful 23implementation of effective professional development. According to these regulations, 24the superintendent may designate someone other than him/herself as the one present 25at the training. 26 27Comment #28: Section 11985.5(c), page 18, Curriculum Review for ELPD requires the 28review panel to review all trainings for an extensive list of qualities and the criteria 29should require that those SBE-selected panel members be able to demonstrate 30thorough knowledge and experience with all of the components for which the trainings 31will be reviewed. The SBE-selected panel should demonstrate direct support and 32experience in working with teachers, schools or districts to actively implement the 33Essential Program Components (EPC’s), under which a large majority of the target 34population identified in the funding priority criteria will be operating. They must 35demonstrate a belief system that English Learners must be provided equitable access 36to core curriculum at every grade level and specific instruction to reach the highest 37levels of receptive and productive language and that these things are possible with 38adequate instruction and scaffolding. With this in mind, additions and clarification 39regarding the selection committee [Section (b)], to be designated by and acting under 40the SBE, should add at minimum the following: 41 42 1. The SBE-selected review panel members should be highly informed about and 43 supportive of the current state and federal initiatives for program improvement in 44 California. They should demonstrate experience working directly with teachers, 45 schools or districts to implement the standards, frameworks and instructional 46 materials with English Learners. If the review panel members are not highly

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 40 of 50 4 5 1 informed about and supportive of the Essential Program Components (EPC’s) 2 that are currently being implemented in the schools and districts in California, 3 they will not have adequate background to support the target population that is 4 identified for funding priority in SB472. 65 2. The SBE-selected review panel members should present letters of 7 recommendation from their district or county level administrators who can attest 8 to the work that the individual has done to directly support the implementation of 9 the approved curriculum, including the EL Universal Access components. The 10 criterion for the committee does not currently require that the panel members 11 know or have experience with the implementation of the adopted curriculum 12 programs; it only requires general knowledge about the frameworks, standards, 13 research and assessment. 1514 3. The SBE-selected review panel characteristics do not include a requirement for 16 the panel members to have been an instructor of or participant in AB466/SB472 17 or AB75/AB430 professional development. In order to have a knowledgeable 18 panel who can review the content for the ELPD institute, there must be a critical 19 mass of individuals who have deep knowledge and experience with the initial 20 40-hour training in order to adequately determine that the ELPD builds from and 21 connects to the initial 40-hour institute. 2322 4. The SBE-selected review panel should demonstrate knowledge and experience 24 with all of the components listed as core requirements for the training to be 25 approved in Section (c). 26 27Response: Section 11985.5(b)(1-6) references the extensive qualification to be a 28reviewer of the ELPD program. As part of the selection process, the review panel 29applicant will be required to provide evidence that the applicant has the requisite 30knowledge to be a qualified reviewer. This section will not be revised. 31 32 Pamela Spycher, Senior Research Associate Director, English Learners and the 33 Language Arts (ELLA), Comprehensive School Assistance Program, WestEd, in 34 an e-mail dated May 25, 2007, submitted two comments: 35 36Comment #1: Regarding Section 11985 Training Curriculum for English Learner 37Professional Development, overall, this section appears to incorporate some critical 38components of the kind of professional development teachers working with EL students’ 39need. However, the section is a bit unwieldy and unclear. For example, while it is 40fundamental that the EL PD training should build upon the initial 40-hour SB 472 41training, this is not explicitly stated in the section. Vague language, such as 42“foundational knowledge” (a) and “essential components of a comprehensive program 43of ELD” (a5) may lead to confusion for providers as there are not widely agreed upon 44definitions of these terms. If these terms are to be used, a glossary would be helpful. 45 46Response: Education Code section 99237.5(d) states that to be eligible for the ELPD 47training, a teacher shall have completed 40 hours of training pursuant to Education 48Code section 99237. In addition, section 99237.5(e) states that a teacher has the option

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 41 of 50 4 5 1of allowing participation in the ELPD training to fulfill fifty percent of the 80 hours of 2follow-up training under Education Code section 99237. In conjunction, these statutes 3indicate that the ELPD training is intended to build upon the initial 40 hours of training. 4Regulations are not required to restate the statute. 5 6SBE considers the terminology included in the regulations sufficiently clear. In the event 7terminology proves to be unclear, SBE will consider amending the regulations to clarify 8terminology. 9 10Comment #2: The EL PD training should extend teachers’ knowledge about language 11development in a particular content area and enhance their pedagogical skills to provide 12effective instruction to EL students. Accordingly, the training should not repeat the initial 1340-hour training, but focus on elements that were not addressed or not deeply 14addressed in the initial 40-hour training. These elements include: 15 16 1. Using CELDT and other language assessment data, including formative 17 assessment, to inform instructional practice and to track student progress over 18 time, 2019 2. Instructional strategies that address the language demands of core content and 21 provide structured and supported opportunities for students to practice, both 22 orally and in writing, new ways of using school language, 2423 3. Current research addressing second language development and instruction that 25 is directly relevant to the core content area in the training, 2726 4. Strategic analysis of the academic content standards, ELD standards, and 28 current curriculum frameworks and how they interrelate with the core curriculum, 3029 5. Ways to use the Universal Access handbooks to provide access to the core 31 content for students at different levels of English linguistic proficiency, and 3332 6. Planning and effectively delivering lessons to EL students, including attention to 34 student engagement, language development objectives, and evaluating the 35 effectiveness of lessons. 36 37Response: The essence of each of these recommendations is included in either 38Section 11985 or Education Code section 99237.5. Accordingly, it is anticipated that the 39essence of these recommendations will be included in the ELPD training.

Shelly Spiegel Coleman, Chairperson, Californians Together, in a fax dated May 25, 2007, submitted twelve comments:

41Comment #1: Regarding Section 11985.6, page 18, line 32, SB 472 was amended to 42include, among other provisions, professional development specific to ELL's for 43teachers instructing these students, within the 40 of the 80 follow up hours. It is critical 44therefore that the providers who will be training the trainers have expertise and 45experience in developing and providing this type of professional development. The 46proposed regulations do not ensure that the training providers possess the knowledge

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 42 of 50 4 5 1and experience in developing and implementing a successful training program specific 2to English learners. Therefore, it is recommended that a new subdivision (a) be 3inserted: 4"Evidence of providing EL professional development that addresses teaching in multi- 5subject, self-contained classrooms or discipline specific classrooms, linguistically and 6culturally diverse student population with attention to all four domains of language 7specific to the development of language and literacy for English learners." 8 9The lettering of the subsequent subdivisions will need to change as well. 10 11Response: Education Code section 99237.5(a)(A-D) outlines the quality standards that 12providers of the must possess to be considered as SB 472 English Learner professional 13development providers. The criteria and provisions included in Sections 11985 through 14and 11985.6 include sufficient requirements to ensure that teachers are being trained by 15providers who have the knowledge and experience to carry out the requirements under 16Education Code section 99237, specifically that the training be “designed to help all 17pupils gain mastery of the California academic content standards with special emphasis 18on English language learners and pupils with exceptional needs.” 19 20Comment #2: Regarding Sections 11985.5(b), page 18 & 11985.6 (b), page 22, it is 21recommended that a call for the establishment of a review panel be comprised of one or 22more reviewers designated by the State Board of Education (SBE) for the purpose or 23reviewing and approving the training providers and the training curriculum. The SB 472 24Advisory Committee is comprised of individuals representing a broad spectrum of 25disciplines and possessing the knowledge, expertise and skills necessary to perform the 26important responsibilities of approving or disapproving a training curriculum and training 27providers. Why reinvent the wheel when a capable cadre of individuals is already 28available to do these important activities. It is recommended that the SBE utilize the SB 29472 Advisory Committee instead of the review panels. 30 31Response: The first part of this recommendation is accepted as is. The review panel for 32the initial training and the English learner training will now consist of two or more 33reviewers. The second part of this recommendation is not accepted. Although it is 34anticipated that members of the Advisory Committee will also function as reviewers on 35the ELPD review panel, other qualified individuals will also be appointed to function in 36this capacity. 37 38Comment #3: Regarding Section 11985(a)(4) Training Curriculum for English Learner 39Professional Development, page 16, lines 18-20, it is recommended that language be 40inserted that includes other types of significant assessments. Inclusion of other types of 41assessments, in addition to standardized tests, is important and necessary in order to 42be better able to understand and utilize all assessments administered to ELL students. 43The following language is recommended: "(4) Readings and discussions of other 44pertinent materials related to EL pupils which address the value of the diagnostic nature 45of language and literacy, multiple measures both formative and summative 46assessments, including but not limited to, the CELDT, standardized tests, the STAR 47system and the CAHSEE; and."

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 43 of 50 4 5 1Response: Education Code section 99237.5(b)(5) requires that instruction be included 2pertaining to analyzing and discussing multiple assessments. Section 11985(a)(4) is 3revised as follows: “Readings and discussions of other pertinent materials related to the 4language and literacy of EL pupils which address the value of the diagnostic nature of 5standardized tests, the STAR system, the CELDT, curriculum embedded assessments, 6and the CAHSEE[.]” 7 8Comment #4: Regarding Section 11985(b), page 16, line 25 the insertion of the word 9"language" would ensure that both English language acquisition and literacy needs are 10being addressed for students who are English learners. Therefore the following revision 11is recommended: "(b) ELD instruction designed to meet the language and academic 12instructional needs of EL pupils, which emphasizes the following….” 13 14Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Section 11985(b) is revised as 15follows: "ELD instruction designed to meet the language and academic instructional 16needs of EL pupils, which emphasizes the following….” 17 18Comment #5: Regarding Section 11985(d)(1), page 17, line 13, the insertion of new 19language ensures that all four areas critical to English acquisition and literacy are 20developed, not just vocabulary and writing development as proposed. Therefore the 21following revision is recommended: "Knowledge of reading/language arts instruction to 22support EL pupils in oral language development, vocabulary development and writing 23development." 24 25Response: This recommendation is accepted as is. Section 11985(d)(1) is revised as 26follows: "Knowledge of reading/language arts instruction to support EL pupils in oral 27language development, vocabulary development, and writing development." 28 29Comment #6: Regarding Section 11985.5 (c)(3), Curriculum Review of English Learner 30Professional Development, page 18, line 25, the following recommendation would 31ensure that the training curriculum to be used by providers of teachers of ELL students 32will also have knowledge of English language development. This is equally important in 33light of the fact that you will have teachers instructing ELL students with no or very little 34knowledge of English. It is recommended that the subdivision be revised to read: "(3) 35Knowledge and understanding of current EL research with regard to teaching 36mathematics, language arts and English language development." 37 38Response: This recommendation is accepted. Section 11985.5(c)(3). Section 3911985.5(c)(5) is deleted. Section 11985.5(c)(3) is revised as follows: “Knowledge and 40understanding of current and confirmed scientific EL research with regard to teaching 41mathematics or reading/language arts and English language development, and how to 42apply this research to classroom practice to increase student learning and language 43acquisition.” 44 45Comment #7: Regarding Section 11985.5(c)(7), page 19, lines 2 – 5, it is 46recommended that this subdivision be deleted and re-letter subsequent subdivisions. 47This section is specific to the "40 follow up" hours of ELL professional development.

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 44 of 50 4 5 1The content of the proposed subdivision (c)(7) is the content that should be contained in 2the first/initial 40 hours or the other 40 hours of follow up. The 40 hours specific to ELL 3professional development will barely provide the time or content specific to ELL 4instruction. 5 6Response: The intent of the ELPD is to deepen the knowledge and application of the 7initial SB 472 training. Providing context during the ELPD training with respect to the 8frameworks is essential. Section 11985.5(c)(7) will not be deleted but is revised as 9follows: “Knowledge and understanding of how to teach the ELD components of the 10SBE adopted instructional materials for kindergarten through grade eight or standards- 11aligned instructional materials for grades nine through twelve.” 12 13Comment #8: Regarding Section 11985.5(e), page 19, line 24 and 11985.6(d), page 1423, line 3, it is recommended that language be inserted in subdivision (e) that would 15require the panel to also provide to the State Board of Education (SBE) the reason(s) 16for their recommendation of approval or disapproval of a curriculum. Insert language 17that would require the SBE to forward a written letter to those entities whose curriculum 18was disapproved and the reason(s) for disapproval. Requiring the submission of why a 19curriculum was disapproved or approved is good public policy and provides for 20important transparency to the process. 21 22Comment #10: Regarding Section 11984.5, Curriculum Review of the Initial Forty 23Hours, page 12, line 17, it is recommended that language be inserted in subdivision (e) 24that would require the panel to also provide to the State Board of Education (SBE) the 25reason(s) for their recommendation of approval or disapproval of a curriculum. It is also 26recommended that language be inserted that would require the SBE to forward a written 27letter to those entities whose curriculum was disapproved and the reason(s) for 28disapproval. Requiring the submission of why a curriculum was disapproved or 29approved is good public policy and provides for important transparency to the process. 30 31Comment #12: Regarding Section 11984.6, Training Providers of the Initial Forty 32Hours, page 14, line 8, the same recommendation is made with respect to inserting 33language requiring the reason(s) for disapproving or approving a prospective provider’s 34written proposal as well as providing a written letter stating the reasons for disapproval 35to rejected providers. 36 37Response to Comments #8, 10, and 12: Sections 11984.5(e) and 11985.5(e) 38regarding the review panel’s recommendation for approval or disapproval of a 39prospective provider’s curriculum is substantially revised as follows: “If the review panel 40determines that the prospective provider’s curriculum does not meet the requirements of 41this section based on documented findings, the review panel shall confer with the 42prospective provider to correct deficiencies for resubmission. The review panel shall 43confer with the prospective provider on as many occasions as the review panel deems 44productive. Thereafter, if the prospective provider’s curriculum is deemed to meet the 45requirements of this section based on documented findings, the review panel shall 46recommend to the SBE that the prospective provider’s curriculum to be approved.”

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 45 of 50 4 5 1Sections 11984.6(d) and 11985.6(d) regarding the review panel’s recommendation for 2approval or disapproval of a prospective provider’s written proposal is substantially 3revised as follows: “If the review panel determines that the prospective provider’s written 4proposal does not meet the requirements of this section based on documented findings, 5the review panel shall confer with the prospective provider to correct deficiencies for 6resubmission. The review panel shall confer with the prospective provider on as many 7occasions as the review panel deems productive. Thereafter, if the prospective 8provider’s written proposal is deemed to meet the requirements of this section based on 9documented findings, the review panel shall recommend to the SBE that the 10prospective provider be approved as a provider.” 11 12Comment #9: Regarding Section 11983, page 8, line 9, Education Code Section 1399237(a)(3)(A)(B) refers to English Language arts and not “reading/language” as 14proposed. 15 16Response: Section 11983(b) is revised as follows: “An LEA participating in the program 17must provide each pupil with currently adopted instructional materials that are aligned to 18the state content standards in English/language arts in accordance with Education Code 19section 99237(a)(3)(A) and (B).” 20 21Comment #11: Regarding Section 11984.6, Training Providers of the Initial Forty 22Hours, page 14, line 8, requiring a prospective provider's experience and qualifications 23regarding training curriculum for special education students or students who are English 24learners should be required not permissive, as is currently proposed. These are two 25student sub-groups requiring special attention on reading/language arts skills therefore 26prospective trainers should demonstrate their experience and qualifications in the 27delivery of a training curriculum to these students. It is recommended to delete the 28words "may include" and insert "including." 29 30Response: The criteria and provisions included in Sections 11984 through and 11984.6 31include sufficient requirements to ensure that teachers are being trained by providers 32who have the knowledge and experience to carry out the requirements under Education 33Code section 99237, specifically that the training be “designed to help all pupils gain 34mastery of the California academic content standards with special emphasis on English 35language learners and pupils with exceptional needs.” 36 37COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD THE SECOND 15-DAY NOTICE, 38FOR DOCUMENTS RELIED UPON IN AMENDING THE REGULATIONS, WAS 39AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC 40 41The documents relied upon in amending the regulations were made available to the 42public from June 7, 2007 through June 21, 2007, inclusive. The following comments 43were received.

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 46 of 50 4 5 1 Alice R. Furry, Kathy Cooper, Sharon Van Vleck, and Beth Rice, Reading Lions 2 Center, in an email received on June 21, 2007, submitted sixteen comments: 3 4The sixteen comments submitted by this agency pertain to the requirements for the SB 5472 ELPD curricula and providers. These comments essentially match the comments 6submitted by this agency and others during the first 15-day public comment period. The 7documents mentioned in the notice for the second 15-day public comment period for 8documents relied upon constitute the recommendations submitted by the SB 472 ELPD 9Advisory Committee, and the documents were relied upon as sources in developing the 10ELPD regulations. The documents developed by the Committee will not be changed. 11However, the SBE notes that the documents have no binding effect and will not serve 12as guidance for the ELPD. Rather, it is the criteria in the regulations and in Education 13Code 99237.5 that will be binding and will help guide the SB 472 ELPD. 14 15COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD THE THIRD 15-DAY NOTICE AND 16PROPOSED REGULATION TEXT WAS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC 17 18The modified text was made available to the public from July 13, 2007 through July 27, 192007, inclusive. Seven comments were received from the Department of Finance. 20 21Comment #1: Sections 11981(a) and 11981.3(a) of the proposed regulations would 22require that any remaining program funds be spent on additional training under MRPDP 23or other professional development related to mathematics or reading. The proposed 24regulations would delete the existing provisions in Section 11982 that authorizes the 25Department of Education (CDE) to redirect unexpended funding to local education 26agencies (LEAs) that have trained more eligible teachers than the percentage funded by 27the annual budget. 28 29Since school districts spend their own funds first for MRPDP and are then reimbursed 30by the CDE, it is unlikely that there would be any remaining funds to allocate to other 31programs. The proposed amendments could be construed to authorize the CDE to 32reallocate unclaimed funds to pay for additional MRPDP training or other professional 33development programs, which would constitute a program expansion. These 34amendments are in direct conflict with the intent of current law to redirect funding to 35LEAs that have trained more eligible teachers than the percentage funded by the annual 36budget, per Education Code section 99234(a)(2). 37 38Response: Sections 11981(a) and 11981.3(a) will have no effect on CDE’s redirection 39of unallocated funding to LEAs. Nor does the deletion of Section 11982 eliminate the 40requirement for CDE to redirect unallocated funds at the end of the fiscal year. The 41requirement to redirect unallocated funding remains in law, specifically Education Code 42section 99234(a)(2). 43 44The language of Sections 11981(a) and 11981.3(a) does not address funds remaining 45at the state level: it only addresses the funds that an LEA has already received for 46teachers who have completed SB 472 training. An LEA receives $1,250 per teacher for

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 47 of 50 4 5 1forty or eighty hours of training regardless of its expenses. Conceivably, an LEA may 2have some SB 472 funds leftover after paying for teacher training under this program. 3For example, this situation can occur when an LEA is an SBE-approved training 4provider and provides training for its own teachers. Because the MRPD program is an 5apportionment program (as opposed to a grant program), the LEA does not return funds 6in excess of its expenses to CDE. These regulations will help ensure that LEAs spend 7any of their remaining program funds on math and reading professional development, 8not on unrelated expenses such as P.E. equipment. Without these regulations, an LEA 9could conceivably spend remaining funds on anything it chooses. 10 11As these regulations address how an LEA, not CDE, may spend remaining funds, SBE 12does not believe the regulations can be construed to authorize the CDE to reallocate 13unclaimed funds to pay for additional MRPD program training or other professional 14development programs. 15 16Comment #2: The proposed regulations would amend Section 11985 (renumbered as 17Section 11981.5) to eliminate the prohibition on awarding funding for additional 18professional development in specified circumstances, such as when a teacher changes 19assignments, if funding is not available at the end of the fiscal year. The intent of this 20proposed amendment is unclear, and could be construed to obligate the state to fund 21additional professional development absent the availability of funding. 22 23Response: Section 11981.5 does not obligate the state to fund additional professional 24development absent the availability of funding. The regulation states that the 25Superintendent shall award funding pursuant to Education Code section 99234. By 26referencing Education Code section 99234, the regulation gives the additional 27categories of teachers (e.g., teachers whose assignment has changed) the same 28standing for funding as other eligible teachers. The funding scheme described in 29Education Code section 99234 does not permit the CDE to exceed the appropriation. 30 31This new regulation will permit an LEA to claim certain high priority teachers within their 32funding cap, which the LEA would not currently be permitted to do. The new regulation 33is necessary because Education Code section 99234(a)(1) instructs an LEA to give 34highest priority to training teachers who have recently changed teaching assignments. 35However, the regulation currently in effect not only assigns last priority for funding to this 36category of teachers but also, in the event of a shortfall, states that the LEA will not 37receive funding from the next fiscal year’s appropriation. This will lead to an unfunded 38state mandated cost. By allowing an LEA to submit its training of these teachers through 39the normal claim process, the LEA can include these teachers within its funding cap and 40be paid. 41 42Comment #3: The proposed regulations would delete Section 11980(a) and (b) 43(renumbered as 11982), which require that LEAs provide assurances to the State Board 44of Education (SBE) that the professional development was delivered by a provider 45approved by the SBE and that the LEA has or will have instructional materials that are 46aligned to the state academic content standards. While current law requires

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 48 of 50 4 5 1assurances from the LEAs that a provider was approved by the SBE and that the 2instructional materials are standards-aligned, deleting these provisions from the 3regulations could create confusion among participating districts and ultimately diminish 4the quality of instruction provided to students. Finance recommends retaining these 5provisions to ensure that teachers are receiving training based upon instructional 6materials that are aligned to the academic content standards. 7 8Response: Education Code section 99237(a)(1) states that, as a condition of receipt of 9funds, an LEA shall submit a certified assurance that it has contracted with a provider 10whose training curriculum was approved by the SBE. In addition, Education Code 11section 99237(a)(3)(A) states that an LEA shall submit a certified assurance that it 12provides each pupil with instructional materials that are aligned to the state content 13standards. Restating the Education Code in regulations would be redundant which may 14give the Office of Administrative Law reason to not approve the regulations. Therefore, 15Section 11982 should not be revised. 16 17Comment #4: The proposed regulations would delete the requirement that LEAs retain 18and make available for inspection for a minimum of five years documentation of when 19the LEA adopted the instructional materials by grade level. 20 21Response: Education Code section 99237(a)(5) requires that, as a condition of receipt 22of funds, an LEA submit a certified assurance that it provides the data elements 23required pursuant to Education Code section 99240. The data elements included in 24Education Code section 99240 do not require that an LEA provide the CDE with 25information regarding the instructional materials they possessed at the time of training. 26SBE believes the requirement that an LEA retain documentation of their instructional 27materials for five years is unnecessary because the information is not required for the 28legislated reports and goes beyond the requirements of the law. 29 30Comment #5: The proposed regulations would delete the requirement in Section 3111980(c) that LEAs provide assurances that they will provide a minimum of 20 hours of 32intensive professional development and a minimum of 20 hours of follow-up 33professional development to instructional aides and paraprofessionals. While funding is 34currently not available to train instructional aides and paraprofessionals, it is unclear 35why the CDE is proposing to delete this provision. 36 37Response: Education Code section 99235 requires that the State Superintendent of 38Public Instruction notify LEAs that they are eligible to receive funding to provide 39instructional aides and paraprofessionals who directly assist with classroom instruction 40in mathematics or reading with professional development training in mathematics or 41reading in an amount of $1,000 per qualifying instructional aide. Funding is calculated in 42accordance with provisions of an item of appropriation in the annual Budget Act for 43instructional aides and paraprofessionals. Section 11980(c) formerly required LEAs to 44assure that they will provide a minimum of 20 hours of intensive professional 45development and a minimum of 20 hours of follow-up professional development to 46instructional aides and paraprofessionals. Although SBE supports professional

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 49 of 50 4 5 1development for paraeducators, the regulation should not require LEAs to provide 2training when the Budget Act does not provide funding. 3 4Comment #6: The proposed regulations would delete the requirement that LEAs 5obtain signed verification of attendance from participants, as specified, for funding and 6audit purposes. While the regulations would continue to require LEAs to retain records 7on the number of hours of training attended, they would no longer specify a method for 8verifying participant attendance. This may hamper the state’s efforts to ensure fiscal and 9programmatic compliance with the MRPD program statute. 10 11Response: Education Code section 99237(b) requires that an LEA certify that 40 hours 12of professional development in mathematics or reading were provided to a teacher. The 13SBE supports each LEA’s ability to obtain verification of each participating teacher’s 14attendance at professional development training. However, the SBE believes the 15former Section 11982(f) was overly prescriptive and goes beyond the requirements of 16the law. 17 18Comment #7: Current law defines standards-aligned instructional materials for 19kindergarten and grades 1 through 8 as materials adopted by the SBE, unless 20otherwise authorized, for purposes of providing training under MRPDP. Section 2111983.5(a) of the regulations currently states that instructional materials “otherwise 22authorized” by the SBE are limited to basic instructional materials that have been 23determined to be in alignment with applicable content standards through a waiver or 24petition approved by the SBE. The proposed regulations would delete the phrase “are 25limited to”, and amend this section to include basic instructional materials that have 26been determined to be in alignment with applicable content standards through a petition 27approved by the SBE. 28 29Finance is concerned that the proposed language could allow instructional materials 30that are not standards-aligned to be used by school districts. The current waiver 31authority already allows the SBE to appropriately consider waivers while also ensuring 32that instructional materials are standards aligned. Accordingly, Finance suggests 33retaining the content of the existing regulations for Section 11983.5(a) 34 35Response: Education Code section 99231(c) defines the phrase "instructional 36materials that are aligned to state standards" as, “for kindergarten and grades 1 to 8, 37inclusive, materials adopted by the state board after January 1, 2001, unless otherwise 38authorized by the state board.” Section 11983.5 further defines the meaning of the 39phrase “otherwise authorized” by the state board by describing two categories of 40instructional materials (i.e., one in subdivision (a) and one in subdivision (b)). The 41former use of the words “and are limited to” in Section 11983.5, subdivision (a), was 42technically improper because “otherwise authorized” instructional materials were not 43limited to those materials described in subdivision (a) but also included the materials 44described in subdivision (b). The regulation is made more accurate by striking the words 45“and are limited to” from subdivision (a). The SBE believes that the striking of these 46words could not reasonably be interpreted as permitting a broad myriad of improper

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 1 3 Page 50 of 50 4 5 1instructional materials to be used. Sections 11983 and 11983.5, together with Education 2Code sections 99231 and 99237, narrowly define what instructional materials may be 3used by an LEA that wants to receive MRPD program funding. 4 5ALTERNATIVES DETERMINATION 6 7The SBE has determined that no alternative would be more effective in carrying out the 8purpose for which the regulation is proposed or would be as effective and less 9burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed regulation. 10 11LOCAL MANDATE DETERMINATION 12 13The proposed regulations do not impose any mandate on local agencies or school 14districts. 15 16REGULATIONS TO BECOME EFFECTIVE UPON FILING 17 18The SBE requests that these regulations become effective upon filing because no 19current regulations are in effect for the English learner professional development portion 20of the program. Delaying of the regulations will also delay the date that teachers may 21begin their training on instruction for English learners. Furthermore, the whole MRPD 22program would benefit from the immediate effectiveness of the regulations because the 23proposed regulations substantially modify and improve upon the existing regulations by 24taking into account the various legislative changes in SB 472, which are already in 25effect as of January 1, 2007. 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 418-2-07

6 5/8/2018 7:53 下午 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 1 of 26 4 5 1 Title 5. EDUCATION 2 Division 1. California Department of Education 3 Chapter 11. Special Programs 4Subchapter 21. Mathematics and Reading Professional Development Program 5 6Renumber 11981 to 11980 7§1198111980. Teacher Eligibility. 8 In addition to those teachers identified in Education Code Ssection 99233, teachers 9who are employed in a public school, who hold a multiple-subject credential, and 10whose primary assignment is to teach in a classroom that is not self-contained, and 11who are employed in a public school, will shall be eligible to receive instruction in: 12 (a) M mathematics if their primary teaching assignment is mathematics, and/or 13science, or both; and may receive instruction in reading/language arts if their primary 14teaching assignment is reading/language arts or social science 15 (b) R r eading if their primary teaching assignment is reading/language arts, social 16science, or both. 17NOTE: Authority cited: Section 99236, Education Code. Reference: Section 99233, 18Education Code. 19 20Renumber 11982 to 11981 21§1198211981. Funding Allocation for Program Training Pursuant to Education 22 Code Section 99237. 23 (a) Funds issued to a Local Educational Agenc y ies (LEA s ) for the Mathematics 24 and Reading Professional Development Program mathematics or 25 reading/language arts training pursuant to Education Code section 99237 shall be 26 used for expenses related to program training in accordance with pursuant to 27 Education Code 99234 that section . If an LEA s has have any remaining program 28funds after paying for program training, then those funds shall be spent for additional 29 program training pursuant to Education Code section 99237 or for other 30professional development related to mathematics or reading/language arts. 31 Funding appropriated but not expended by the end of the fiscal year may be

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 2 of 26 4 5 1redirected to local educational agencies that have trained more eligible teachers than 2the percentage funded pursuant to Education Code Section 99234(a). 3 (b) At the end of each state fiscal year, the California Department of Education 4(CDE) shall accrue any remaining balance in the appropriations for this program until 5 funding reverts for a state fiscal year. Accrued funding shall be used only to pay for 6training completed during the same state fiscal year in which the accrued 7 funding was appropriated. CDE shall allocate accrued funding in accordance 8 with pursuant to Education Code section 99234 (a) . 9 (c) Current-year funding shall be allocated in accordance with Education Code 10 section 99234(e). 11 (d) Reimbursement for program training is limited to those teachers who provide 12direct instruction to pupils on either a part-time or full-time basis. 13 (e) Of the $1,000 stipend per qualified training stipend that a n LEA may pay a 14teacher, no more than $500 may be paid upon completion of the 40 hours of initial 15training, and no more than $500 may be paid upon completion of the 80 hours of 16follow-up professional development. 17NOTE: Authority cited: Section 99236, Education Code. Reference: Sections 99233, 1899234, and 99237, Education Code. 19 20New 11981.3 21§11981.3. Funding Allocation for Teachers of English Learners 22 (a) Program funds issued to an LEA for the 40-hour English learner (EL) 23professional development for teachers of EL pupils shall be used for the EL 24professional development program described in Education Code section 2599237.5. If an LEA has any remaining program funds after paying for EL 26professional development, then those funds shall be spent for additional EL 27professional development pursuant to Education Code section 99237.5 or for 28other professional development which focuses on improving the delivery of 29mathematics or reading/language arts instruction to EL pupils. 30 (b) At the end of each state fiscal year, the CDE shall accrue any remaining

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 3 of 26 4 5 1balance in the appropriations for this program until funding reverts for a state 2fiscal year. Accrued funding shall be used only to pay for training completed 3during the same state fiscal year in which the funding was appropriated. From 4 funds appropriated in the annual Budget Act for Education Code section 99237.5 5in a given state fiscal year, the CDE shall allocate accrued funding as follows: 6 (1) Claims for EL training that are postmarked or faxed to the CDE by 7 November 15 th of the following state fiscal year and that meet at least one of the 8three funding criteria specified in Education Code section 99237.5(c) shall 9receive first priority for funding. An LEA shall indicate on the claim each criterion 10under which it qualifies for priority in funding. If funding is insufficient to fully 11fund all of these claims, then the CDE shall prorate the funds. The proration shall 12consist of first dividing the funds appropriated in the annual Budget Act by the 13product of $1,250 and the total number of teachers who received EL training as 14reflected in these first priority claims. The resulting number shall then be 15multiplied by 100 to determine the maximum percentage of an LEA’s trained 16teachers for which reimbursement may be made pursuant to this subdivision. As 17it deems necessary, the CDE may adjust the percentage, which shall apply 18equally to all LEAs, to ensure that the amount appropriated in the annual Budget 19Act is not exceeded. 20 (2) If funding remains after paying all the claims specified in subdivision (b) 21(1), then claims for EL training that are postmarked or faxed to the CDE by 22 November 15 th of the following state fiscal year and that do not meet any of the 23 funding criteria specified in Education Code section 99237.5(c) shall receive 24second priority for funding. If funding is insufficient to fully fund all of these 25claims, then the CDE shall prorate the funds. The proration shall consist of first 26dividing the remaining funds by the product of $1,250 and the total number of 27teachers who received EL training as reflected in these second priority claims. 28The resulting number shall then be multiplied by 100 to determine the maximum 29percentage of an LEA’s trained teachers for which reimbursement may be made 30pursuant to this subdivision. As it deems necessary, the CDE may adjust the

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 4 of 26 4 5 1percentage, which shall apply equally to all LEAs, to ensure that the amount 2appropriated in the annual Budget Act is not exceeded. 3 (3) If funding remains after paying all the claims specified in subdivisions (b) 4(1) and (b)(2), then claims for EL training that are postmarked or faxed to the CDE 5 after November 15 th of the following state fiscal year shall be funded on a first- 6 come-first-served basis according to the date the claim is postmarked or faxed 7 and provided the claim is postmarked or faxed by the second March 1 st date after 8 the November 15 th date in this subdivision. If funding is insufficient to fully fund 9all the claims received on the same day, then the CDE shall prorate the funds. 10The proration shall consist of first dividing the remaining funds by the product of 11$1,250 and the total number of teachers who received EL training as reflected in 12the claims received by the CDE on that day. The resulting number shall then be 13multiplied by 100 to determine the maximum percentage of an LEA’s trained 14teachers for which reimbursement may be made pursuant to this subdivision. As 15it deems necessary, the CDE may adjust the percentage, which shall apply 16equally to all LEAs, to ensure that the amount appropriated in the annual Budget 17Act is not exceeded. 18 (c) If a teacher elects to count the completion of 40-hours EL professional 19development towards the 80 hours of follow-up professional development 20described in Education Code section 99237, the LEA may request $1,250 21reimbursement after the teacher has completed the 40-hours EL professional 22development and another $1,250 reimbursement after the teacher has completed 23the remaining 40 hours of the 80 hours of follow-up professional development. 24Of these amounts, the LEA may issue an individual teacher stipend up to $500 25 after completion of the 40 - hours EL professional development and up to another 26$500 after completion of the remaining 40 hours of the 80 hours of the follow-up 27professional development. 28 (d) A claim transmitted to the CDE by facsimile during the hours of 12:00 29midnight to 5 p.m. is deemed faxed on the date received. A claim that begins 30transmission on or after 5:01 p.m. is deemed faxed on the next regular business 31day.

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 5 of 26 4 5 1NOTE: Authority cited: Section 99236, Education Code. Reference: Sections 299233, 99234 and 99237.5, Education Code. 3 4Renumber 11985 to 11981.5 5§ 1198511981.5. Participation Requirement Funding Limitations. 6 (a) The Superintendent of Public Instruction shall award funding to local educational 7agencies for each participant that fully meets the hour requirements of the Mathematics 8and Reading Professional Development Program (Article 3, Chapter 5, of Part 65 of the 9Education Code [Sections 99234(h) and 99237(b)] and Subchapter 21, Chapter 11, 10Division 1 of Title 5, California Code of Regulations [Section 11980(c)]). 11 (a)(b) Beginning in the 2004-05 fiscal year, such fFunding from the mathematics 12 and Reading Professional Development Program for training pursuant to 13Education Code section 99237 shall be limited to one 120-hour sequence of 14professional development divided into 40 hours of initial training and 80 hours of follow- 15up professional development per subject area for each teacher eligible to receive 16instruction as set forth in Education Code Ssection 99233 Title 5, and California Code 17of Regulations, title 5, Ssection 11981 11980. In addition to the funding available 18under Education Code section 99237, funding for EL training pursuant to 19 Education Code section 99237.5 is limited to a total of 40 hours for each teacher 20of EL pupils. 21 (b)(c) Beginning in the 2004-05 fiscal year, such professional development Program 22funding shall be limited to one training per subject area for each paraprofessional and 23instructional aide eligible to receive instruction as set forth in Education Code Ssection 2499233. 25 (c)(d) Notwithstanding subdivision (a)(b), if funding is available at the end of a fiscal 26year, the State Superintendent of Public Instruction shall also award funding pursuant 27to Education Code section 99234 for additional professional development training to 28eligible teachers if any of the following conditions applies: 29 (1) The local educational agency LEA has changed its adopted a new instructional 30materials program and approved training is available for the new program; 31 (2) The teacher's assignment has changed; or

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 6 of 26 4 5 1 (3) The teacher's course assignment has changed to an area in which the teacher 2has not previously received the applicable training. 3 (e) If no funding is available at the end of a fiscal year, the Superintendent of Public 4Instruction shall not award funding for additional professional development training 5pursuant to subdivision (d). 6 NOTE: Authority cited: Section 99236, Education Code. Reference: Sections 99233, 799234(h), 99237(b), and 99237.5, Education Code. 8 9Renumber 11980 to 11982 10§1198011982. Local Education Agencies’ Assurances of Compliance. 11 In addition to the assurances specified in Education Code section 99237(a), an local 12educational agencies LEA applying for program funding from the Mathematics and 13Reading Professional Development Program shall provide assurances to the California 14State Board of Education (SBE) that: 15 (a) the professional development was delivered by a provider or providers approved 16by the State Board of Education or provided by a California Professional Development 17Institute that incorporates professional development on instructional materials newly 18adopted by the State Board of Education and complies with the provisions of Education 19Code section 99237(a)(2), (b) and (f); 20 (b) the local educational agency has or will have by the commencement of training, 21instructional materials for each student that are aligned to state academic content 22standards in reading/language arts and mathematics in those grades and subject areas 23for which the local educational agency intends to receive payment for training teachers, 24and the local educational agency shall retain and make available for inspection for a 25minimum of five years documentation of when the local educational agency adopted 26these materials and for what grade levels; 27 (c) the local educational agency will provide a minimum of 20 hours of intensive 28professional development and a minimum of 20 hours of follow-up professional 29development to instructional aides and paraprofessionals. 30 (a) I it has read and is familiar with the regulations governing the program, which 31 include California Code of Regulations, title 5, sections 11980 through 11985.6 11986 ;

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 7 of 26 4 5 1 (b)(d) the local educational agency I it will retain and provide all information, 2including preprogram and postprogram pupil achievement data, required for the interim 3and final reports to the Legislature regarding the program pursuant to as required by 4Education Code sections 99237.5 and 99240; and 5 (c)(e) the local educational agency I it will retain all records related to the 6professional development provided to participants in the Mathematics and Reading 7Professional Development Pprogram for no less than five years, and that these records 8will shall include, but not be limited to: 9 (1) T the number of hours of training attended; 10 (2) A a ttendance records; 11 (3) S s ubject the content; 12 (4) the dates of each training session professional development taken by teachers, 13instructional aides, and paraprofessionals; and 14 (5) T the name/s of the providers.; 15 (f) The local education agency shall retain professional development attendance 16records for teachers, instructional aides, and paraprofessionals for funding and audit 17purposes; the local education agency shall obtain participant attendance signature 18verification no less than three times during each full day of training and no less than 19two times during each partial day of training; and these records shall be available for 20inspection. 21NOTE: Authority cited: Section 99236, Education Code. Reference: Sections 60605, 2299233, 99234, 99237, 99237.5 and 99240, Education Code. 23 24Renumber 11986 to 11982.5 25§1198611982.5. Eligible Local Educational Agencies as a Consortium. 26 For purposes of the Mathematics and Reading Professional Development Program, 27a county office of education may coordinate a consortium of school districts that 28functions as a single local educational agency LEA. 29NOTE: Authority cited: Section 99236, Education Code. Reference: Sections 44579.5, 3099231, 99237(e) and 99237.5, Education Code.

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 8 of 26 4 5 1 2§11983. Instructional Materials. 3 (a) Instructional materials used by local educational agencies an LEA s for courses 4usually taught in grades kindergarten through 8, including algebra, must be adopted by 5the State Board of Education SBE unless otherwise authorized by the State Board of 6Education SBE. Non-adopted instructional materials are occasionally authorized for 7purchase and use by districts pursuant to the general waiver authority under Education 8Code sections 33050-33053 or the petition process under the authority of Education 9Code section 60200(g). Instructional materials used by local educational agencies an 10 LEA s for courses usually taught in grades 9 through 12, including algebra II and 11geometry, must be adopted by the governing board of the LEA local educational 12agency. 13 (b) Local educational agencies An LEA s participating in the Mathematics and 14Reading Professional Development Program must provide each pupil with currently 15adopted instructional materials that are aligned to the state content standards in 16mathematics by February 2002, if not piloting, or February 2003, if piloting these 17materials. Local educational agencies An LEA s participating in the Mathematics and 18Reading Professional Development Pprogram must provide each pupil with currently 19adopted instructional materials that are aligned to the state content standards in 20Englishreading/language arts by February 2003, if not piloting, or February 2004, if 21piloting these materials in accordance with Education Code section 99237(a)(3)(A) 22and (B). 23NOTE: Authority cited: Section 99236, Education Code. Reference: Sections 99237(a) 24(3)(A) and (B) and 99237.5, Education Code. 25 26§11983.5. Definition of “Instructional Materials…Otherwise Authorized by the 27California State Board of Education.” 28 (a) As used in Education Code section 99231(c), “instructional materials ... 29“otherwise authorized” by the State Board of Education SBE ” include, and are limited 30to, basic instructional materials as defined in Education Code section 60010(a) that

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 9 of 26 4 5 1have been determined to be in alignment with applicable content standards through a 2petition approved by the SBE after May 1, 2000, pursuant to Education Code section 360200(g).: 4 (1) A waiver granted by the State Board of Education after October 1, 2000, 5pursuant to Education Code sections 33050 and 33051, of provisions of the Schiff- 6Bustamante Standards-Based Instructional Materials Programs Act (Education Code 7sections 60450 et. seq.), or; 8 (2) A petition approved by the State Board of Education after May 1, 2000, pursuant 9to Education Code section 60200(g). 10 (b) In addition, if the instructional materials program used by the local educational 11agency (LEA) is a basic reading/language arts program (RLA), the instructional 12materials shall be deemed to be “otherwise authorized” provided the LEA certifies to 13the California Department of Education CDE on California Department of Education 14form AB 466 -- Application for Funding, Fiscal Years 2001-02 and 2002-03 (6/2002) or 15California Department of Education form AB 466 -- Application For Reimbursement 16Past Training, Fiscal Years 1999-2000, 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 (5/2002),which are 17incorporated by reference, prior to receiving the funding, all of the following: 18 (1) The instructional materials were purchased by the district prior to the 2002 19Reading/Language Arts/English Language Development Adoption (RLA/ELD); 20 (2) The LEA has in place specially designed instructional materials (component) to 21address the needs of E L nglish language learners (ELL) pupils that is comparable to 22the instructional materials (component) approved and contained in the RLA/ELD 23programs adopted in January 2002 as approved by the State BoardChair of the 24Curriculum Development and Supplemental Materials Commission or his or her 25designee; 26 (3) The LEA's specially designed component to address the needs of English 27learners EL L pupils has been approved by the State Department of Education CDE for 28legal and social compliance pursuant to Education Code sections 60040-60048 and the 29State Board of Education's SBE’s “Standards for Evaluating Instructional Materials for 30Social Content” (2000 Edition) which is incorporated by reference;, and;

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 10 of 26 4 5 1 (4) The publishers have met all the requirements of Education Code section 60061, 2as applicable. 3NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 33031 and 99236, Education Code. Reference: 4Section 99231(c) and 99236, Education Code. 5 6§11984. Instructional Aides and ParaprofessionalsTraining Curriculum for the 7Initial Forty Hours. 8 In determining the maximum funding for training instructional aides and 9paraprofessionals, the Superintendent of Public Instruction shall use 2000 CBEDS data 10in 2001-02, and may use subsequent years CBEDS data in future years. In the event 11that the number of instructional aides and paraprofessionals as determined by CBEDS 12exceeds the maximum number to be served as defined in Education Code Section 1399235(a), the Superintendent of Public Instruction shall determine a percentage pro 14rata reduction and apply it to each district's number of instructional aides and 15paraprofessionals. 16 Training curriculum for training the Mathematics and Reading Professional 17 Development Program related to the initial forty hours of instruction described in 18 Education Code section 99237 shall be based on the criteria contained in Education 19 Code section 99237, subdivisions (a) and (b), and the requirements of this section. The 20 owner of the training curriculum Each training provider shall submit its curriculum 21 to SBE or its designee for approval by the SBE and include in its curriculum the 22following: 23 (a) Instructional strategies designed to help all pupils gain mastery of the California 24 academic content standards, with special emphasis on EL L pupils and pupils with 25exceptional needs; 26 (b) A thorough review of the curriculum framework and academic content standards 27related to teaching mathematics or reading/language arts; 28 (c) Current and confirmed s S cientific ally - based research findings related to the 29instructional practices for mathematics or reading/language arts; 30 (d) Readings and discussions of other pertinent materials which address the value

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 11 of 26 4 5 1of the diagnostic nature of standardized tests, the Standardized Testing and Reporting 2 (STAR) system, and the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) ; and 3 (e) A thorough review of the adopted standards-based instructional materials 4program, which emphasizes the following: 5 (1) The material that is taught during the first six to eight weeks of instruction; and 6 (2) Instructional strategies that use the universal access and English language 7development (ELD) components of the program so that teachers will know and 8understand when and how to use them according to the instructional needs of all 9students. 10NOTE Note: Authority cited: Section 99236, Education Code. Reference: Section 119923799235(a), Education Code. 12 13Renumber 11985 to 11984.5 14 § 11985 11984.5. Curriculum Review of the Initial Forty Hours. 15 (a) Each training provider’s curriculum for training related to the initial forty 16 hours of instruction described in Education Code section 99237 shall undergo a 17 formal review process before being approved by the SBE to determine if it meets 18the conditions pursuant to section 11984 for the Mathematics and Reading 19 Professional Development program. The review shall be based on Education 20Code section 99237, subdivisions (a)(2), (a)(4), and (b), California Code of 21Regulations, title 5, section 11984, and subdivision (c) of this section. 22 ( b)The formal review process shall include a review panel consisting of at least two 23 qualified reviewers two one or more reviewers designated by the SBE and acting 24under its direction. To be a qualified reviewer, a reviewer shall have knowledge of 25 information related to mathematics or reading, as applicable, including : 26 (1) A a cademic content standards ,; 27 (2) C c urriculum frameworks ,; 28 (3) I i nstructional and teaching strategies included in the SBE adopted and 29 standards-aligned core and ancillary instructional materials,; 30 (4) C c urrent and confirmed scientific research ,; and

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 12 of 26 4 5 1 (5) Aassessment L linkage between curriculum and assessment with the use of 2standardized tests, curriculum-embedded assessments, the STAR system, the 3California English Language Development Test (CELDT), and CAHSEE for diagnostic 4information related to all pupils to curriculum , and instructional core and ancillary 5materials that are approved by the SBE and standards-aligned. 6 (c) The review shall be based on Education Code section 99237, subdivisions 7(a)(4) and (b), California Code of Regulations, title 5, section 11984, and 8subdivision (d) of this section. 9 (c) (d) The review panel shall review each training provider’s curriculum submission 10for its ability to produce the following learning outcomes for participants: 11 (1) K k nowledge of grade level mathematics standards or English reading /language 12arts standards, including the ability to effectively teach such standards; 13 (2) K k nowledge and understanding of how standards are supported through the 14curriculum ar frameworks in regard to differentiating instruction through universal 15 access and teaching various instructional strategies related to mathematics or 16reading/language arts; 17 (3) K k nowledge and understanding of current and confirmed scientific research and 18various technology resources with regard to teaching mathematics or reading/language 19arts; 20 (4) K k nowledge and understanding of the components of the STAR program and 21how student results impact and inform instruction; 22 (5) F f amiliarity with key reference materials included in the instructional materials; 23 (6) K k nowledge and understanding of the use of daily lesson guides; 24 (7) K k nowledge and understanding of how to teach all key instructional 25components; 26 (8) F f amiliarity with effective use of additional program support materials for all 27 pupils, including but not limited to accelerated and advanced learners, EL L pupils and 28pupils with exceptional needs; and 29 (9) K k nowledge and understanding of how to analyze assessments included in the 30instructional materials for more effective instruction.

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 13 of 26 4 5 1 (d) If the review panel determines that the training curriculum meets the 2requirements referenced in this section based on documented findings, the review 3panel shall recommend approval of the curriculum to the SBE. 4 (e) If the review panel determines that the prospective provider’s training 5 curriculum does not meet the requirements referenced of in this section based on 6documented findings, the review panel shall confer with the prospective provider to 7correct deficiencies for resubmission. The review panel shall confer with the 8 prospective provider on as many occasions as the review panel deems productive. 9Thereafter, if the prospective provider’s curriculum is deemed to meet the requirements 10of this section based on documented findings, the review panel shall recommend to the 11 SBE that the prospective provider’s curriculum be approved either, in its discretion, 12recommend to the SBE disapproval of the curriculum or confer with the owner of the 13curriculum to correct deficiencies. Prior to making a recommendation to the SBE, the 14review panel may confer with the owner of the curriculum on as many occasions as the 15review panel deems productive. Thereafter, the review panel shall recommend to the 16 SBE either approval or disapproval of the curriculum . 17 (f) In addition to any other lawful consideration, the SBE may base its 18approval or disapproval of a training curriculum upon any of the items 19referenced in this section or the recommendation of the review panel. 20NOTE: Authority cited: Section 99236, Education Code. Reference: Section 99237, 21Education Code. 22 23Renumber 11986 to11984.6 24 § 11986 11984.6. Training Providers of the Initial Forty Hours. 25 (a) In addition to submitting curriculum pursuant to section 11984, E e ach 26 prospective training provider of the Mathematics and Reading Professional 27 Development Program who seeks to provide training related to the initial forty 28 hours of instruction described in Education Code section 99237 shall also submit 29 a written proposal to the SBE CDE or its designee that includes the following: 30 (1) (a) A complete, annotated, and scripted instructor’s training curriculum notebook 31or manual which includes a timed agenda, all of the overheads or Power Point

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 14 of 26 4 5 1 presentations used by the provider and instructor, and citations for all materials to be 2included for each grade level or program/course level; 3 (2) A statement describing whether the training curriculum described in 4subdivision (a)(1) is either: 5 (A) Owned by the prospective provider; or 6 (B) Being used with the express written consent of the party that owns it. 7 (3) A statement identifying whether the training curriculum described in 8subdivision (a)(1) has already been approved by the SBE and, if so, the date of 9the SBE meeting; 10 (4) (b) A provision that each attendee will be provided with a participant notebook or 11manual with required readings; 12 (5) (c) A provision that a complete set of adopted grade level or program or course 13level materials, including both teacher and student as well as electronic components, 14will be available at each training session; 15 (6) (d) A provision that participants will have an opportunity to make up the minimum 16time requirements of the training by providing the LEA with the provider’s web page 17and/or training calendar, when available; 18 (7) (e) A description of the training delivery methods, table and room set-up, and 19classroom structures that support adult learning theory and optimal learning; 20 (8) (f) A descriptive breakdown of instructional time as follows: 21 (A) (1) Thirty percent for presentation and direct instruction of academic content 22standards, curriculum framework, and approved instructional material’s core and 23ancillary components, including universal access components; 24 (B) (2) Forty percent for demonstrations and modeling of key routines to illustrate 25instructional strategies that ensure all pupils master the academic content standards, 26 with emphasis on EL L pupils and pupils with exceptional needs; and 27 (C) (3) Thirty percent for practice, planning instruction based on data and student 28work, small and large group discussion, and other participant activities to reinforce 29learning. 30 (9) (g) A provision that the ratio of participants to instructor(s) will not exceed 31 35 to 1; a second instructor will be available when class size exceeds 35 ;

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 15 of 26 4 5 1 (10) (h) An estimate of the number of authorized instructors to deliver training over 2the next five years; 3 (11) (i) A description of how it will collaborate with the LEA in planning and delivering 4the training which also ensures that the superintendent or his/her designee will be 5present during the training; 6 (12) (j) A description of whether it plans to offer alternative training formats or 7delivery models to small, remote, or rural LEAs, including the option of webcast 8training; 9 (13) (k) Evidence of the prospective provider’s experience and qualifications to 10deliver its training curriculum, which may include evaluation data from past trainings 11 and information demonstrating knowledge of Reading First, state and federal 12 programs, sanction and intervention processes , s S pecial e E ducation , and EL L 13 pupils , and assessment literacy; 14 (14) (l) Documentation of each lead instructor’s experience and qualifications to 15deliver training; 16 (15) (m) A description of its instructor selection and training process, including but 17not limited to how instructors are selected and trained to deliver its curriculum; 18 (16) (n) A provision that attendance data will be collected and provided to the LEA, 19including the number of teachers, by credential type, who have received training on its 20curriculum; 21 (17) (o) A provision that when major updates or revisions occur with curriculum, the 22prospective provider will not use the new material until after the material has 23 been the most current copy will be submitted to the CDE for review for program 24 assurances pursuant to sections 11984 and 11984.5 11985 and approved by the 25 SBE ; and 26 (18) (p) A provision that it has read and will comply with the Mathematics and 27Reading Professional Development Program regulations found in California Code of 28 Regulations, title 5, sections 11980 through 11985.6 11986 , as applicable. 29 (b) Each prospective training provider’s written proposal shall undergo review 30by a review panel consisting of two one or more reviewers designated by the SBE 31and acting under its direction. The review panel shall evaluate whether the

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 16 of 26 4 5 1prospective provider’s written proposal contains each of the items identified in 2subdivision (a) and whether the written proposal demonstrates the prospective 3 provider’s ability to effectively deliver training. To be a qualified reviewer, a 4reviewer shall have knowledge of information related to mathematics or reading, 5as applicable, including: 6 ( 1) Academic content standards; 7 (2) Curriculum frameworks; 8 (3) Instructional and teaching strategies included in the SBE adopted and 9 standards-aligned core and ancillary instructional materials; 10 (4) Current and confirmed scientific research; and 11 (5) Assessment linkage to curriculum. 12 (c) If the review panel determines that the prospective provider’s written 13 proposal satisfies the requirements of this section based on documented findings, 14the review panel shall recommend to the SBE that the prospective provider be 15approved as a provider. 16 (d) If the review panel determines that the prospective provider’s written 17proposal does not meet the requirements of this section based on documented 18findings, the review panel shall confer with prospective provider to correct deficiencies 19 for resubmission. The review panel shall confer with the prospective provider on as 20many occasions as the review panel deems productive. Thereafter, if the prospective 21provider’s written proposal is deemed to meet the requirements of this section based 22on documented findings , in its discretion, either recommend to the SBE that the 23prospective provider not be approved as a provider or confer with the prospective 24provider to correct deficiencies. Prior to making a recommendation to the SBE, the 25review panel may confer with the prospective provider on as many occasions as the 26 review panel deems productive. Thereafter, the review panel shall recommend to 27 the SBE either that the prospective provider be approved or disapproved as a 28provider. 29 (e) In addition to any other lawful consideration, the SBE may base its 30approval or disapproval of a prospective provider upon any of the items listed in 31this section or the recommendation of the review panel.

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 17 of 26 4 5 1 (f) A provider approved by the SBE pursuant to this section is only authorized 2to provide training using the training curriculum it submitted pursuant to 3subdivision (a). 4NOTE: Authority cited: Section 99236, Education Code. Reference: Sections 99237 5and 99240, Education Code. 6 7New §11985 8 §11985. Training Curriculum for English Learner Professional Development. 9 Training curriculum related to the EL professional development described in 10Education Code section 99237.5 shall be based on the criteria contained in 11Education Code section 99237.5, subdivisions (a) and (b), and the requirements 12of this section. The owner of the training curriculum shall submit its curriculum 13to SBE or its designee for approval by the SBE and include the following: 14 (a) Foundational knowledge specifically designed to assist EL pupils to attain 15a high level of English language proficiency and mastery of the California 16mathematics and English/language arts academic content standards , while gaining 17 mastery of the California academic content standards across the curriculum, that 18emphasizes the following: 19 (1) Instructional strategies using SBE adopted instructional materials for 20kindergarten through grade eight, standards-aligned instructional materials for 21grades nine through twelve, and c C ertified s S upplemental m M aterials for English 22l L earners to assist teachers in understanding when and how to use them to 23address according to the instructional needs of all EL pupils; 24 (2) A thorough review of the specific sections of the curriculum frameworks , that 25pertain to EL pupils, academic content standards, and ELD standards relevant to 26 instructing EL pupils ; 27 (3) Current and confirmed s S cientific ally based research related to the 28instructional practices for EL pupils; 29 (4) Readings and discussions of other pertinent materials related to the 30language and literacy of EL pupils which address the value of the diagnostic

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 18 of 26 4 5 1nature of standardized tests, the STAR system, the CELDT, curriculum-embedded 2assessments, and the CAHSEE; and 3 (5) Essential components of a comprehensive program of ELD that include s 4actively developing all domains of language, addressing various levels of 5English proficiency and academic English while fluency, and creating a supportive 6learning environment for language learning. 7 (b) ELD instruction designed to meet the language and academic instructional 8 needs of EL pupils , that which emphasizes the following: 9 (1) Effective use of the ELD components of the SBE adopted instructional 10materials for kindergarten through grade eight specifically designed to help 11teachers of EL pupils understand ELD content; 12 (2) Current and confirmed s S cientific ally-based research findings related to the 13instructional practices for second language learning; 14 (3) A thorough understanding of different levels of English language 15proficiency and how to plan instruction for each level; 16 (4) The planning of ELD instruction to effectively and efficiently use ELD 17 s S tandards and c C ertified s S upplemental m M aterials for English l L earners as 18tools for ELD instruction; and 19 (5) Development of vocabulary and language structures for purposeful oral 20and written communication that emphasizes structured opportunities for 21practice. 22 (c) Reading/language arts and content area instruction to help teachers of EL 23pupils understand and apply knowledge of linguistic structures to SBE adopted 24instructional materials for kindergarten through grade eight, standards-aligned 25instructional materials for grades nine through twelve, and c C ertified 26s S upplemental m M aterials for English l L earners . 27 (d)Reading/language arts and content area instruction that emphasizes the 28following: 29 (1) Knowledge of reading/language arts instruction to support EL pupils in 30oral language development, vocabulary development, and writing development; 31 (2) A thorough review and analysis of linguistic features;

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 19 of 26 4 5 1 (3) Contrastive analysis that leads to understanding the transfer of skills and 2concepts from one language to another; 3 ( 4) Effective comprehension and instructional strategies to teach essential content; 4 (4) (5) Text and lesson analysis for language and content demands; and 5 (5) (6) Analysis of second language markers in oral and written language 6 production to inform and design instruction. 7NOTE: Authority cited: Section 99236, Education Code. Reference: Section 899237.5, Education Code. 9 10New §11985.5 11 § 11985.5. Curriculum Review of English Learner Professional Development. 12 (a) Each training curriculum for training pursuant to Education Code section 1399327.5 shall undergo a formal review process before being approved by the 14SBE. The review shall be based on Education Code section 99237.5, 15subdivisions (a)(4) and (b), California Code of Regulations, title 5, section 11985, 16and subdivision (c) of this section. 17 (b) The formal review process shall include a review panel consisting of 18two one or more reviewers designated by the SBE and acting under its direction. 19To be a qualified reviewer, a reviewer shall have experience teaching EL pupils 20and have knowledge of information related to mathematics or reading, as 21applicable, including: 22 (1) Academic content standards and ELD standards; 23 (2) Curriculum frameworks; 24 (3) Instructional and teaching strategies included in the SBE adopted and 25standards-aligned core and ancillary instructional materials; 26 (4) Current and confirmed scientific research and current and confirmed 27scientific research related to EL pupils; 28 (5) Certified s S upplemental m M aterials for English l L earners; and 29 (6) Linkage between Assessment linkage to curriculum and assessment with the 30use of standardized tests, curriculum-embedded assessments, the STAR system,

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 20 of 26 4 5 1CELDT, and CAHSEE for diagnostic information related to EL pupils, including but not 2 limited to the California English Language Development Test (CELDT) . 3 (c) The review panel shall review each training curriculum submission for its 4ability to produce the following learning outcomes for participants: 5 (1) Knowledge and understanding of the language and contentcognitive and 6 linguistic demands required for EL pupils to access grade level appropriate 7academic content standards and ELD standards; 8 (2) Knowledge and understanding of how standards are supported through 9the curriculum ar frameworks in regard to differentiating instruction through 10 universal access and teaching various instructional strategies related to 11mathematics or reading/language arts for EL pupils; 12 (3) Knowledge and understanding of current and confirmed scientific EL 13research with regard to teaching mathematics or reading/language arts and ELD, 14including how to apply this research to classroom practice in order to increase student 15learning and language acquisition; 16 (4) Knowledge and understanding of how to analyze and use data from 17multiple measures, including the components of the STAR program, CELDT, and 18curriculum-embedded assessments and how student results impact and inform 19instruction for EL pupils; 20 (5) Knowledge and understanding of how to apply second language learning 21research to classroom practice in order to increase student learning and language 22acquisition; 23 (5) (6) Knowledge and understanding of how to plan and teach ELD and 24monitor student progress at each level of English proficiency; 25 (6) (7) Knowledge and understanding of how to teach the ELDall key 26 instructional components of the SBE adopted instructional materials for 27 kindergarten through grade eight , or standards-aligned instructional materials for 28 grades nine through twelve , and Certified Supplemental Materials for English 29 Learners ; 30 (7) (8) Demonstrate the ability to effectively and efficiently teach content 31 standards to mastery using ELD standards and methodology to scaffold;

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 21 of 26 4 5 1 (8) (9) Knowledge and understanding of oral language development , vocabulary 2development, and writing development; 3 (9) (10) Knowledge and understanding of effective comprehension and 4instructional strategies to teach content through text and lesson s analysis that 5support EL pupils in language development; and 6 (10) (11) Knowledge and understanding of early intervention techniques for pupils 7experiencing difficulty identification of students who need early intervention . 8 (d) If the review panel determines that the training curriculum meets the 9requirements referenced in this section based on documented findings, the review 10panel shall recommend approval of the curriculum to the SBE. 11 (e) If the review panel determines that the prospective provider’s training 12 curriculum does not meet the requirements referenced in of this section based on 13documented findings, the review panel shall confer with the prospective provider to 14 correct deficiencies for resubmission. The review panel shall confer with the 15prospective provider on as many occasions as the review panel deems productive. 16Thereafter, if the prospective provider’s curriculum is deemed to meet the requirements 17of this section based on documented findings, the review panel shall recommend to the 18 SBE that the prospective provider’s curriculum be approved. either, in its discretion, 19recommend to the SBE disapproval of the curriculum or confer with the owner of the 20curriculum to correct deficiencies. Prior to making a recommendation to the SBE, the 21review panel may confer with the owner of the curriculum on as many occasions as the 22review panel deems productive. Thereafter, the review panel shall recommend to the 23SBE either approval or disapproval of the curriculum. 24 (f) In addition to any other lawful consideration, the SBE may base its 25approval or disapproval of a training curriculum upon any of the items 26referenced in this section or the recommendation of the review panel. 27NOTE: Authority cited: Section 99236, Education Code. Reference: Section 2899237.5, Education Code. 29New §11985.6 30 § 11985.6. Training Providers of English Learner Professional Development.

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 22 of 26 4 5 1 (a) Each prospective training provider who seeks to provide training pursuant 2to Education Code section 99237.5 shall submit a written proposal to the SBE or 3its designee that includes the following: 4 (1) A complete, annotated, and scripted instructor’s training curriculum 5notebook or manual which includes a timed agenda, all of the overheads or 6Power Point presentations used by the provider and instructor, and all materials 7to be included for each grade level, grade span, or program/course level; 8 (2) A statement describing whether the training curriculum described in 9subdivision (a)(1) is either: 10 (A) Owned by the prospective provider; or 11 (B) Being used with the express written consent of the party that owns it. 12 (3) A statement identifying whether the training curriculum described in 13subdivision (a)(1) has already been approved by the SBE and, if so, the date of 14the SBE meeting; 15 (4) A provision that each attendee will be provided with a participant notebook 16or manual with required readings; 17 (5) A provision that participants will have an opportunity to make up the 18minimum time requirements of the training by providing the LEA with the 19provider’s web page and/or training calendar, when available; 20 (6) A description of the training delivery methods, table and room set-up, and 21classroom structures that support adult learning theory and optimal learning; 22 (7) A description of how the training design will equip participants with the 23necessary skills and knowledge to be fully prepared to use their standards-based 24SBE adopted instructional materials or standards-aligned instructional materials 25to teach EL pupils at their academic and language proficiency levels; 26 (8) A descriptive breakdown of instructional time as follows: 27 (A) Thirty percent for presentation and direct instruction of current and 28confirmed scientific research as related to the effective instruction of English learners, 29including the use of levels of language proficiency and the ELD standards to scaffold 30 instruction, allowing access to core, grade-level content area instruction EL theoretical

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 23 of 26 4 5 1framework, research, and academic content standards while using ELD standards to 2deliver instruction; 3 (B) Forty Thirty percent for demonstrations and modeling of key routines to 4illustrate instructional strategies that include whole and small group differentiated 5instruction by English language proficiency levels to ensure EL pupils’ mastery of 6mathematics and English/language arts content standards, ELD standards, and 7academic language proficiencyinstructional strategies that ensure all pupils master the 8academic content standards, ELD standards, use of academic language, through 9 differentiated instruction based on English language proficiency ; and 10 (C) Thirty Forty percent for practice, planning instruction based upon data and 11student work, small and large group discussion, and other participant activities 12to reinforce learning. 13 (9) A provision that the ratio of participants to instructor(s) does not exceed 1435 to 1; 15 (10) An estimate of the number of authorized instructors to deliver training 16over the next five years; 17 (11) A description of how it will collaborate with the LEA in planning and 18delivering the training which also ensures that the superintendent or his/her 19designee will be present during the training; 20 (12) A description of whether it plans to offer alternative training formats or 21delivery models to small, remote, or rural LEAs, including the option of webcast 22training; 23 (13) Evidence of the prospective provider’s experience and qualifications to 24deliver its training curriculum, which may include: 25 (A) Evaluation data from past trainings; 26 (B) Information demonstrating knowledge of state and federal programs, 27including sanction and intervention processes, and how they support and relate 28to EL academic achievement; 29 (C) Knowledge of standards-based SBE adopted instructional materials or 30standards-aligned instructional materials; and

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 24 of 26 4 5 1 (D) Knowledge of c C ertified s S upplemental m M aterials for English l L earners 2adopted pursuant to the Budget Act of 2004 and pursuant to Chapter 79 of the 3Statutes of 2006. 4 (14) Documentation of each lead instructor’s experience and qualifications to 5deliver EL training; 6 (15) A description of its instructor selection and training process, including 7but not limited to how instructors are selected and trained to deliver its 8curriculum; 9 (16) A provision that attendance data will be collected and provided to the 10LEA, including the number of teachers, by credential type, who have received 11training on its curriculum; 12 (17) A provision that when major updates or revisions occur with curriculum, 13the prospective provider will not use the new materials until after the material 14has been submitted for review pursuant to sections 11985 and 11985.5 and 15approved by the SBE; and 16 (18) A provision that it has read and will comply with the Mathematics and 17Reading Professional Development Program regulations found in California 18Code of Regulations, title 5, sections 11980 through 11985.6, as applicable. 19 (b) Each prospective training provider’s written proposal shall undergo 20review by a review panel consisting of two one or more reviewers designated by 21the SBE and acting under its direction. The review panel shall evaluate whether 22the prospective provider’s written proposal contains each of the items identified 23in subdivision (a) and whether the written proposal demonstrates the 24 prospective provider’s ability to effectively deliver training. To be a qualified 25reviewer, a reviewer shall have experience teaching EL pupils and have 26knowledge and information related to mathematics or reading, as applicable, 27including: 28 (1) Academic content standards and ELD standards; 29 (2) Curriculum frameworks; 30 (3) Instructional and teaching strategies included in the SBE adopted and 31standards-aligned core and ancillary instructional materials;

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 25 of 26 4 5 1 (4) Current and confirmed scientific research and current and confirmed 2scientific research related to EL pupils; 3 (5) Certified s S upplemental m M aterials for English l L earners; and 4 (6) Linkage between curriculum and assessment with the use of standardized tests, 5curriculum-embedded assessments, the STAR system, CELDT, and CAHSEE for 6diagnostic information related to EL pupilsAssessment linkage to curriculum, including 7 but not limited to the CELDT . 8 (c) If the review panel determines that the prospective provider’s written 9proposal satisfies the requirements of this section based on documented findings, 10the review panel shall recommend to the SBE that the prospective provider be 11approved as a provider. 12 (d) If the review panel determines that the prospective provider’s written 13proposal does not meet the requirements of this section based on documented 14findings, the review panel shall , confer with the prospective provider to correct 15deficiencies for resubmission. The review panel shall confer with the prospective 16provider on as many occasions as the review panel deems productive. Thereafter, if 17the prospective provider’s written proposal is deemed to meet the requirements of this 18section based on documented findings, the review panel shall recommend to the SBE 19 that the prospective provider be approved as a provider .in its discretion, either 20recommend to the SBE that the prospective provider not be approved as a provider or 21confer with the prospective provider to correct deficiencies. Prior to making a 22recommendation to the SBE, the review panel may confer with the prospective provider 23on as many occasions as the review panel deems productive. Thereafter, the review 24panel shall recommend to the SBE either that the prospective provider be approved or 25 disapproved as a provider . 26 (e) In addition to any other lawful consideration, the SBE may base its 27approval or disapproval of a prospective provider upon any of the items listed in 28this section or the recommendation of the review panel. 29 (f) A provider approved by the SBE pursuant to this section is only authorized 30to provide training using the training curriculum it submitted pursuant to 31subdivision (a).

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7 1 cib-pdd-sep07item02 2 Attachment 2 3 Page 26 of 26 4 5 1NOTE: Authority cited: Section 99236, Education Code. Reference: Sections 299237.5 and 99240, Education Code. 3 4 506-22-07 [California Department of Education]

6 5/8/2018 7:53 PM 7

Load more

  78

Copy Link