CSMP (California Subject Matter Programs) (Pdf)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Report on California Subject Matter Project, 2006-2010 January 2011 Legislative Report An investment in UC pays dividends far beyond what can be measured in dollars. An educated, high-achieving citizenry is priceless. Budget and Capital Resources December 2009 UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA Budget and Capital Resources January 2011 University of California Office of the President UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA CALIFORNIA SUBJECT MATTER PROJECT A Report to the Legislature on the California Subject Matter Project for Academic Years 2006-2010 OFFICE OF THE VICE PROVOST EDUCATION PARTNERSHIPS Report on the California Subject Matter Project, 2006‐2010 Page 1 Budget and Capital Resources January 2011 Table of Contents Legislative Request ........................................................................................................ 3 UCOP Response ............................................................................................................. 4 Number and Experience of Participants ......................................................................... 4 Funds Expended ............................................................................................................. 5 Professional Development Activities Offered ................................................................ 6 Professional Development Program Outcomes ............................................................ 10 Affiliated Schools ......................................................................................................... 12 Appendix A - CSMP Service Schools .......................................................................... 15 Appendix B - References ............................................................................................. 16 Appendix C - Supplemental Data for the Arts, Foreign Language, and Physical Education-Health Projects ............................................................................................ 17 List of Figures and Tables Table 1: CSMP Number of Distinct Participants Served, 2006-2010 ............................ 4 Figure 1: CSMP Teacher Participants’ Total Years Teaching Experience, 2006-2010 . 5 Funds Expended ............................................................................................................. 5 Table 2: CSMP Funds Expended, 2006-2010 ................................................................ 5 Table 3: CSMP Average Project Participant Hours Spent in Professional Development Institutes Per Year, 2006-2010 ..................................................................................... 11 Table 4: CSMP Professional Development Activities Offered, 2006-2010 ................ 11 Figure 2: CSMP Professional Development Outcomes Reported by Teacher Participants, 2005 ......................................................................................................... 12 Table 5: CSMP Top Ten Cities with the Most Schools Served, 2006-2010 ................ 12 Table 6: CSMP Service Schools, 2006-2010 ............................................................... 13 Figure 3: CSMP Service Schools by Location and Subject Area, 2006-2010 ............. 14 Report on the California Subject Matter Project, 2006‐2010 Page 2 Budget and Capital Resources January 2011 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Report on the California Subject Matter Project, 2006-2010 Legislative Request This report complies with Section 99200 of the Education Code – amended in 2007 by Senate Bill No. 232, Chapter 292 – which requires the California Subject Matter Project (CSMP) Concurrence Committee to provide a final report to the Governor and to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature on or before January 1, 2011. The report covers a four-year period and provides specific information about the CSMP, namely: (A) The number, and level of experience, of participants in each subject matter project. (B) The total amount of funds expended, on an annual basis, for each subject matter project. (C) An explanation of the type of professional development activities offered pursuant to each subject matter project. (D) A list including the name and location of each school affiliated with a subject matter project.1 The Concurrence Committee is comprised of individuals affiliated with leadership, management, or instruction, in education or education policy entities and are selected as follows: (1) One representative selected by the Regents of the University of California. (2) One representative selected by the Board of Trustees of the California State University. (3) Two representatives selected by the State Board of Education, at least one of whom has significant experience with direct classroom instruction. (4) One representative selected by the Governor. (5) One representative selected by the Commission on Teacher Credentialing. (6) One representative selected by the Curriculum Development and Supplemental Materials Commission. (7) One representative of the California Community Colleges selected by the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges. (8) One representative of an independent postsecondary institution selected by the Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities.2 1 Source: California Education Code, Section 99200 (b) (3). 2 Source: California Education Code, Section 99200 (d). Report on the California Subject Matter Project, 2006‐2010 Page 3 Budget and Capital Resources January 2011 UCOP Response The University, with the approval of the Concurrence Committee, has statutory responsibility to establish, administer, and maintain a network of professional development programs. These programs are designed to create opportunities for researchers, higher education faculty, and elementary and secondary school faculty to work together to identify exemplary teaching practices, examine and develop research on learning, knowledge, and educational materials, and to provide support to teachers to develop and enhance content knowledge and pedagogical skills. Consistent with the Education Code, which requires a four-year report as noted above, the Concurrence Committee has approved this report on the writing, reading and literature, mathematics, science, history-social science, and international studies projects. The report covers July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2010 and provides for each subject matter project the experience of participants, funds expended, professional development activities offered, and affiliated schools. Number and Experience of Participants From 2006-2010, CSMP served 94,703 distinct participants.3 Table 1 below provides the number of distinct participants by each subject matter project. Table 1: CSMP Number of Distinct Participants Served, 2006-2010 Project Name Number of Distinct People Served History-Social Science 7,588 International Studies 5,267 Math 21,841 Reading and Literature 22,297 Science 10,234 Writing 38,735 Overall, the projects serve teachers at all stages of their careers, from novice teachers with 1-3 years of experience (40.89% of total participants) to veteran teachers with 6 years of experience or more (29.41%). Most teachers served have less than 6 years of teaching experience (70.3%). However, the teaching experience of participants varies between subject matter projects, as shown in Figure 1. 3 Although the figures in Table 1 add up to 105,962, upon removal of any people that participated in more than one project the number of distinct participants served by the six CSMP projects totals 94,703. Report on the California Subject Matter Project, 2006‐2010 Page 4 Budget and Capital Resources January 2011 Figure 1: CSMP Teacher Participants’ Total Years Teaching Experience, 2006-2010 28% History-Social Science 31% 41% 27% International Studies 30% 43% 24% Mathematics 28% 47% 6 years or more 34% Reading and Literature 30% 4-6 years 36% 1-3 years 27% Science 30% 43% 28% Writing 30% 42% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% A major focus of the subject matter projects is to foster the development of teacher leaders. Teacher leaders are individuals who are skilled in a discipline and share their expertise with other teachers, such as novice teachers. Funds Expended There is one statewide office for each of the subject areas. Table 2 provides a four-year summary of expenditures for each subject matter project. Expenditures covered program operations and statewide office functions. The number of sites per subject area varies from 7 to 23 and this is the primary reason for funding allocation differences. Table 2 shows expenditures of State funds provided through annual Budget Acts and federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) funds.4 Table 2: CSMP Funds Expended, 2006-2010 History- Reading Social International and Science Studies Math Literature Science Writing TOTAL 2006-2007 $731,435 $736,011 $992,349 $1,502,297 $1,402,732 $1,470,650 $6,835,474 2007-2008 $718,918 $719,120 $1,384,152 $1,275,152 $1,252,897 $1,385,130 $6,735,369 2008-2009 $828,802 $760,687 $1,385,461 $1,282,069 $1,257,737 $1,412,374 $6,927,130 2009-2010 $698,318 $695,397 $1,324,848 $1,225,122 $1,252,209 $1,423,607 $6,619,501 4 This information doesn’t include other money sites may receive from district contracts or other one-time sources. Report on the California Subject Matter Project, 2006‐2010 Page 5 Budget and Capital Resources January 2011 While the California Education Code only requires legislative reporting on the six projects discussed above, per Senate Bill No. 611, Chapter 857 (2003) the University is also authorized to provide maintenance-level funding