|
By Jim Caswell
“What are you
gonna be when you grow up?” This is a serious question especially for
continuation students who seem to be preoccupied with the “what’s happening now”
mentality. Too many of our students appear to be satisfied with just living
day-to-day waiting for tomorrow to swallow them up and then being content with
whatever comes out the other end. As a kid, I wanted to be something and yet to
be something was to be someone. Even as my values and goals changed, I knew that
what I was going to become in life was important and that it would be my choice
to make.
Over the past
sixteen years that I have been a continuation administrator, I have developed
many theories as to why students are not goal driven, values stimulated, or
genuinely interested in their futures. The day that I can pen a definitive
answer to this question will be the day that my boat comes in! Until that time,
all of us must be content to continue to examine each student to determine what
works and to make our best diagnosis one student at a time.
The
individualized approach to student success becomes more difficult as we all
attempt to get our students to pass the CAHSEE. This one-size-fits–all test will
mean failure for many of our students in the class of 2004 and beyond. Statewide
indicators currently show that only about half of all students have passed the
test. For most continuation schools, this number is far less than 50%. When one
factors in the effect of the new federal No Child Left Behind law that mandates
Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) among all sub groups in the school, the plight in
many continuation schools will become even more disturbing. Janet Knoeppel and I
have been traveling
around the state
speaking with principals about how NCLB will likely affect continuation
programs. We were only able to reach about a hundred school administrators. I
would suggest that everyone get a copy of the legislation and check out the
consequences that might be there for your programs.
All schools have
now received your 2001-02 Continuation School Annual Report request. Getting
this information back to me in a timely manner is very important. Continuation
Education needs to speak with authority when addressing the CDE or the State
Legislature. This information will give CCEA the knowledge about what we really
accomplish in our schools which has been lacking since the early 1990’s. Please
complete the entire survey if you can. If you don’t collect all the information
requested, it would be a good idea to begin collecting the data for next year’s
report.
The fall CDR
meeting was held recently in Los Angeles. Attendance was high and from all of
the reports and discussions that took place, all of you are being well
represented by your district and state officers. One important item that was
discussed was a proposed change in our Constitution. All members will see in
this newsletter these proposed changes. Please provide your input by voting
your feelings in a timely manner.
Now that the
elections are over, perhaps Sacramento politicians can get back to the business
of running the State. The one thing that seems quite clear is that there will
be little new money for educational change over the next two or three years.
There is still plenty of work for CCEA to accomplish to safeguard the interests
of our students and staff. Your Executive Board has identified four major
issues facing CCEA during this year. These issues are:
1.
The California Exit Exam and school
accountability
2.
Funding for low performing schools
3.
Support from the newly elected State
Superintendent of Public Instruction
4.
Class size and instructional time
Rest assured that
the Executive Board and Peter Birdsall & Associates, our political consultants
in Sacramento, will be working together to make certain that the concerns of
continuation education are considered in all legislative matters.
On a final note,
CCEA has recently written, published and mailed a new continuation handbook to
every high school superintendent in California. In addition, key members of the
State Legislature and the CDE will also be receiving their copy. This manual
describes all of those factors that go into making a great continuation program
and describes all of the truths about why continuation education is a vital part
of education in California. The committee, chaired by Janet Knoeppel spent ten
months putting the book together with the assistance of the CDE and consultant
Dennis Fisher. Other members of the committee included Jim Caswell, Joyce
Bowcock, Gerry Catanzarite, Kay Eatmon, Barbara Wenk, Marion St.Amant, Suzanne
Toyrla, Anne Waggoner and Robert Meier. Thanks to everyone for your efforts.
This is a book that should be in every school. The cost is only $10. Contact
Janet or your District President for information on how to get your copy.
It’s not too
early to start planning for this year’s state conference in San Francisco May
2-4, 2003.
This should be
the best conference ever and will be approved for NCLB and most other funding
sources.
Legislative Update
[
top ]
Peter Birdsall & Theresa Inslee
Governor Signs
Legislation
Impacting High Schools
Monday, September
30th, marked the last day for the Governor to sign or veto any
legislation remaining before him for the remainder of this legislative session.
The Governor had 30 days to act on measures that were approved by the
Legislature and forwarded to him for consideration. The following provides an
update on the Governor’s actions related to some of the significant K-12
education measures this session. All measures signed by the Governor will
become operative on January 1, 2003 unless otherwise noted.
AB 312
(Strom-Martin) –
Low Performing Schools:
Signed into law.
This measure
specifies how $29 million in new federal funding will be allocated to assist
schools identified as in need of improvement under federal and state law. AB
312 became operative upon the Governor’s signature.
AB 1781
(Hertzberg) –
Instructional Materials:
Signed into law.
This measure
establishes a new program for instructional materials funding, called the
“Instructional Materials Funding Realignment Program” (IMFRP). AB 1781
specifies the criteria districts must meet as part of the new program. Among
other provisions, the measure would require districts to ensure that each
student is provided standards aligned materials by the beginning of the first
school term that starts no later than 24 months after the textbook adoption by
the State Board. AB 1781 also authorizes school districts to use any remaining
funds to purchase supplemental materials and classroom library materials once
they certify compliance with the requirement concerning standards‑aligned
materials.
The Governor
signed AB 1781 with the intent that clean-up legislation would be introduced
next year to address a “broadly worded” provision of the measure. At issue is
the flexibility available to school districts to purchase supplemental materials
and basic instructional materials for subjects outside the four core curriculum
areas.
AB 2600 (Pavley)
–
High School Exit Exam:
Vetoed.
This measure
would have required the Superintendent of Public Instruction to develop, and the
State Board of Education to adopt, guidelines for assessments that could serve
as alternatives to the High School Exit Exam (HSEE) for disabled individuals who
cannot participate in the HSEE regardless of accommodation or modification.
AB 2834 (Migden)
–
School District Audits:
Signed into law.
This measure will
implement an agreement reached between the education community and the
Department of Finance on key reforms related to the school audit process, as
well as formally discontinue the controversial 1996-97 average daily attendance
(ADA) audits. AB 2834 overhauls the process in which the K-12 Audit Guide is
approved annually; designates the Education Audits Appeal Panel (EAAP) as its
own state agency with the ability to approve settlements and make findings of
fact and interpretations of current law; creates a new waiver and resolution
process for school agencies with minor audit findings; and establishes new
requirements for the quality control of independent school agency auditors.
SB 1476
(O’Connell) –
High School Exit Exam:
Signed into law.
The measure
allows local governing boards to waive the High School Exit Exam (HSEE)
requirement for high school graduation for special education students whose
disability prevents them from taking either part of the exam without
modification that alters the validity of the exam.
SB 1453
(Alpert) –Longitudinal Pupil
Achievement Data System:
Signed into law.
This measure
requires the Department of Education to contract for the development of
proposals that will provide for the retention and analysis of longitudinal
student achievement data on the STAR and English language development tests and
the high school exit examination. Among its other provision, SB 1453 requires
the CDE to convene an advisory board to establish privacy and access protocols,
provide guidance, and make recommendations on desirable data elements. The
measure would also require the department to contract with a consultant for
independent project oversight. SB 1453 became operative upon the Governor’s
signature.
Aligning ASAM with
AYP
With the passage
of the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, the state has begun
examining its options in an effort to comply with the new requirements. At its
meeting last month, the State Board of Education (SBE) began consideration of
several potential alternatives for conforming the Alternative Schools
Accountability Model (ASAM) with NCLB in order to meet federal requirements.
Specifically, NCLB contains reporting requirements that mandate states to
establish one statewide accountability system for all schools. The
federal law does appear to allow use of the ASAM as part of this system.
While it is too
early to provide any specific information on any one proposal, the SBE is
scheduled to discuss this issue again at its November meeting. The Board has
until January 2003 to determine the best possible method in which to align ASAM
with AYP, while maintaining an accountability system that applies to all
schools. CCEA will be an
active
participant in these discussions.
Eastin Identifies
Potential Budget Cuts
Governor Davis
has directed state agencies to identify potential 20% in expenditure reductions
in order to address the state’s anticipated budget crisis. On September 18th,
Superintendent of Public Instruction, Delaine Eastin, responded to this
request.
Following are
excerpts from her letter as well as a more detailed listing of proposed
reductions submitted by the Department of Education.
“Dear Governor Davis:
“I am writing to you in response to
your request for a 20 percent cut in the California Department of Education’s
budget. I have labored long and hard to accommodate the 5 percent cut and the
15 percent cut requested by you and the Department of Finance. I cannot in good
conscience tell you how I can accomplish a 20 percent cut without doing great
harm to our core business, holding schools accountable for assisting students to
achieve academic success…
“The scope of
work in this Department is not decreasing, it is dramatically increasing. So
the cuts I have enclosed I do not recommend. Many of those I put forward cannot
be accomplished without legislative changes. Some cuts we could make will
jeopardize federal funds and place at risk state general funds if we are forced
to pay the federal government back. That seems to be a foolish approach…
“So I offer
the Department of Education cuts without recommending most of them. We have
forwarded the details to Tim Gage. They do not equal 20 percent. Perhaps my
successors will be able to assist you further.”
Among the potential reductions
identified by the Department were the following:
·
Eliminate state
operations support for the Teaching as a Priority (TAP) Block Grant Program.
·
Reduce the Healthy Start
state operations.
·
Eliminate the Gang Risk
Intervention Program (GRIP).
·
No longer provide
technical assistance in the area of education technology.
·
Eliminate state support
and oversight of the CalSAFE program.
Vice President's Letter
[
top ]
Jeanne Yttreness
Model
Continuation High
School Recognition Program
The Model
Continuation High School Recognition Program is sponsored by the California
Department of Education (CDE) Special, Alternative, and Continuation Education
Division, in cooperation with the our organization. The complete application
package is available in PDF format and will be available soon on our website.
The Model School
program identifies and recognizes outstanding programs and creates a resource
bank of quality programs for other schools. CDE and CCEA encourage all
continuation high schools that have been in operation for a minimum of two years
and which meet other eligibility criteria to review their programs and submit an
application for statewide recognition.
If you have any
questions, call either myself at
South Valley High
(707-463-5220) or
Dennis Fisher at
CDE
(916-445-5613)
dfisher@cde.ca.gov
Exemplary
Programs/ Projects
Just a friendly
reminder to be thinking of your outstanding programs/projects and be prepared to
submit them by February 1, 2003. Information can be located on our website.
The goal is to
provide an opportunity for all continuation or alternative schools to reap the
benefit of the numerous special programs that have been developed by our
members. It is intended that through this process every continuation or
alternative school in the state can replicate the selected programs/projects.
The programs/projects must be submitted by any current professional member of
CCEA or any employee of a school who has a school membership in CCEA. Each
school is limited to a single submission each year.
Questions, call
Jeanne Yttreness 707-463-5220
What
Impact Will the
[
top ]
“No Child Left Behind”
Legislation Have on Your School?
by Janet Knoeppel
The
reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, better known as
“No Child Left Behind,” (NCLB) has caused some concern throughout the state and
nation. Unfortunately, neither the Federal Government, nor our own State
Government has all the answers. Like us, they are still searching for the
appropriate guidelines with which to answer all the questions this legislation
has spawned. One thing to remember is that the authors of this legislation,
George W. Bush and Senator Ted Kennedy, were both educated in private prep
schools, as were their children. Neither man has any experience in dealing with
students who attend the public K-12 educational systems in place across the
nation. They especially do not have any experience in working with the at-risk
population with whom we interact on a continuing basis. I make this point,
because we must be proactive in dealing with this legislation rather than
reactive. We need to plan for the ways we will implement and deal with the
mandates contained in NCLB. This article is a quick summary to help you better
understand what is contained in this legislation.
First:
All teachers must be
“highly qualified!” Of course! That is what we all want. NCLB defines “highly
qualified” as those individuals who possess appropriate licensing (a
credential), a bachelor’s degree, and expertise in the subject(s) they teach.
The only problem with this is that in Continuation Schools teachers may teach
any subject, as long as they have a valid teaching credential issued by the
State of California. This indicates that those who are teaching outside their
field of expertise will have to attend classes and/or professional development
opportunities in order to ensure expertise in the fields they have not studied.
Second:
Paraprofessionals must
also be qualified with a minimum of 60 college credits.
Third:
Parents have the right
to request information on the educational backgrounds of both teachers and
paraprofessionals working with their child. The school/district must notify
parents if their child’s teacher is not “highly qualified.” (Some school
districts are already doing this.)
Fourth:
Greater parent
participation is encouraged and there are some specific parameters included.
These include encouraging parents to become more involved in their children’s
education. They are to be viewed as full partners with the schools in making
educational decisions for their children. They are to serve on advisory
committees, school site councils and other decision-making bodies that exist in
their schools in order to assist with the education of their children. And,
there must be annual yearly contact between the parents and the districts.
While there is no definitive ruling on this, the indication is that every
student will have an individual learning program (ILP) in order to inform and
track progress.
Fifth:
All schools must make
“Adequate Yearly Progress,” both schoolwide, and in any significant subgroups
within their student population. While there was some initial concern over the
California API scores for those students in traditional schools, those issues
have been resolved. However, there is concern over the schools that are a part
of the ASAM (Alternative Schools Accountability Model). As you are no doubt
aware, there are many in California who believe all students should be a part of
the API . . . one size fits all! After working for the last four years to
develop an accountability system that is meaningful to continuation schools and
other alternative programs, we are once again in a position of having to defend
our programs based on a norm referenced test without taking into account any of
the things that we do that really demonstrate the successes of our students.
Currently, the individuals working on the ASAM are looking at all
possibilities. We believe that there is a single phrase that allows us to go
forward with the ASAM as our accountability measure. That phrase states that
“schools whose purpose is to serve students for less than a full academic year,”
will, in all likelihood, fall under the ASAM. However, because our students can
earn a high school diploma from our schools, there are those who feel that we
are not providing anything different than the traditional schools. These
individuals do not look at the differences in instructional strategies or the
other components that make our schools so unique, as well as successful.
Because of the high transiency rate of our students, we believe a case can be
made that will allow us to remain in the ASAM in order to determine our AYP.
We need your help
in order to get the word out to those who really do not understand our schools
and programs. Please call legislators and the State Board of Education Members
and invite them to visit your schools. There are many wonderful programs out
there that will help make the case for why we need to
remain in the
ASAM. We want these people to see all of our schools, not just Model Schools.
Even though you may not be a Model School, call and invite them to see what
challenges you face on a daily basis. Show them the statistics that show our
mobility rate is high. It is not at all unusual for a school, in order to
maintain a constant enrollment, to enroll 4 to 5 times that number of students
throughout the year.
One of the keys
to all of this legislation is that each individual state may set their own
threshold of what makes a student competent. Many of you may have seen the
article that came out during early October that told of the results of the
schools and students in Arkansas. According to their reporting, there is not a
single student or a single school in the entire state that falls into the
under-performing category! Yet, states like Illinois, Massachusetts and
California are very concerned about this part of the legislation, as they have
significant numbers of schools and students who are currently reported in the
under-performing category.
Sixth:
Title I schools that do
not make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for two consecutive years must offer the
students a choice to enroll in another school that is not in program
improvement, plus the district must pay all transportation costs for those
students.
Seventh:
Federal Title I funds
can be used for a variety of program supplements. Special tutoring, after
school classes, intercession and summer school are just a few of the options to
help improve student progress.
Eighth:
All LEP students will
be tested in English once they have attended school in the United States for
three consecutive years. We already do this, so this is not something new.
Ninth:
Transfer options are
available for parents whose children are attending unsafe schools or if they
have been the victims of violence at these schools. At this point, no one has
defined unsafe schools.
Tenth:
The funds for the
professional development component of NCLB have been taken from a combination of
Eisenhower Professional Development and Federal Class Size Reduction programs
that have been melded into a new “Improving Teacher Quality” State Grant. It
grants States and LEAs flexibility to select strategies that best meet their
needs for improved teaching that will help them raise student achievement in
core subjects.
Eleventh:
Concerning professional
development options there are some restrictions:
·
No one-day or short-term
workshops or conferences with no continuing strand in the future.
·
May include partnership
programs for prospective or beginning teachers.
·
May provide
certification for paraprofessionals.
·
May provide follow-up
training for staff.
·
Can be used to improve
or increase teachers’ knowledge of academic subjects.
·
Any professional
development that uses NCLB monies must be an integral part of the broad
school-wide and district educational improvement plan.
·
Can be used to give
staff knowledge and skills to provide students with opportunities to meet
·
challenging State
academic content standards.
·
May be used to improve
classroom management skills.
·
Can be used to advance
teacher understanding of effective instructional strategies.
·
May be used to ensure
alignment with State academic content standards.
·
May be developed with
extensive participation of teachers, administrators and parents.
·
To provide teachers of
LEP students the knowledge and skills to help these students attain
proficiency.
·
To provide training for
teachers and administrators in use of technology in the classroom.
·
Must regularly be
evaluated to determine the impact on increased teacher effectiveness and
improved student learning.
·
May be used to provide
instructional strategies for the teaching of students with special needs.
·
May be used to provide
instruction in the use of data and assessments that will improve teaching.
·
Maybe used to provide
instruction for working more effectively with parents.
There are four
different entities that may provide this staff development: A school entity
(your district), an institution of higher learning (colleges/universities),
for-profit and not-for-profit organizations (a company like Hewlett Packard and
an organization like CCEA), and a faith-based organization.
Constitution Revision
[
top ]
Information
and Ballot
On Friday, October 17, 2002,
the California Continuation Education Association (CCEA) Council of District
Representatives (CDR) approved, by unanimous vote, the revisions to the CCEA
constitution listed below. These revisions were developed by the CDR
Constitution Committee to correct errors and to bring the constitution language
into alignment with current practices. Final approval for constitutional change
rests with the CCEA membership. To vote, please complete and submit the ballot
on the back of this document,
The following are the
proposed revisions. Deletions are shown in Strikethrough text and
additions are underlined. All revisions are marked with a line in the
left margin. Full text of the revised constitution may be found on the CCEA
website at
www.cceanet.org.
ARTICLE II. COUNCIL
OF DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVES (CDR)
2. Representatives to the
Council of District Representative
The Council of District Representatives is the
official state body of the California Continuation Education Association and
shall be composed of the representatives (president and past-president) from
each of the CCEA districts. The executive officers of CDR are elected by the
presidents and past-presidents of the various CCEA districts or their authorized
representatives (Sec. II, B, P.6 of by-laws) attending the election
meeting of CDR. The CDR will specify in the CDR By-laws and the District 15
Charters how the district representatives to CDR are selected when a
president or past-president is unable to serve.
 6.
Mail Vote by the Council of District Representative
 c.
Actions taken by mail vote are valid only when the president has in his
possession signed yes responses from two-thirds of the voting CDR membership.
(presidents and past-presidents or appropriate alternates of the various local
CCEA districts) (Sec. II- B, of CDR By-laws.)
ARTICLE IV. MEMBERSHIP
AND DUES
2. Application for
Membership
Application for individual membership shall be made
by submission of completed membership form and payment of dues to the
officers of one of the local districts State Treasurer.
3. Relationship of
Membership and District
Any individualMembers may join and
participate in California Continuation Education Association activities through
any CCEA district.
5. Amount and
Distribution of Dues
The amount of the membership dues can be changed
only by two-thirds vote of the CDR membership. The amount will be
specified in the District Charters. The funds collected for all
memberships will be divided between the local district collecting the funds
and CDR as follows: three-fifths (3/5) to the state treasurer and two-fifths
(2/5) to the local district treasurer.
ARTICLE V. CHANGES
IN THE CONSTITUTION
1. Recommendations for
Constitutional Changes
Recommendations for constitutional change must be
proposed at a CDR meeting, studied by the By-Laws, District Charters and
Constitution Committee prior the next CDR meeting, and approved by the CDR
with a two-thirds vote of its membership at the next CDR meeting before
it is submitted to the statewide membership for vote.
California Continuation
Education Association
Ballot to Revise the CCEA Constitution
(Revisions Approved by the CDR on October 17, 2002)
Directions:
1.
Declare that you are a current member of CCEA by checking the box next to
the membership statement.
2.
Vote for or against the revision by checking the box next to the
statement of your choice.
3.
Return the ballot to State President, Jim Caswell at: Nueva High School, 8600 Palm Ave.,
Lamont, CA 93241.
 I
am a member of the California Continuation Education Association for the
2002-03 school year.
 I
vote to APPROVE the revisions to the CCEA Constitution.
I
vote to NOT APPROVE the revisions to the CCEA Constitution.
CCEANet
[
top ]
California Continuation Education
Association
Home Page at
www.cceanet.org
Novvember 2002 Report
General Information
CCEANet was established in April of 1997 by a vote of the CCEA Council of
District Representatives and is now over five years old. CCEANet is actually
made up of five separate websites: the main CCEANet Home site, the eDirectory
of Continuation High Schools site, the Discussion Forum site, the PowerPoint
Presentation site, and the Secure Server site. Together these five websites now
offer over 1640 files, including 452 pictures and graphics and over 6630
hyperlinks. CCEANet now holds approximately 47 megabytes of data. Since last
April, the site has grown by over 120 files and 6 megabytes of data. The
CCEANet Webmaster, Gerry Catanzarite, may be contacted at
pgcatan@cceanet.org.
New
Features
- We now have an alternate
web address:
www.ccea.us. The “.us” ending is the new top level domain extension for
the United States. This new address moves the user to the regular CCEANet
home page.
- We have moved the website
to a larger more powerful server for an increased cost of only five cents per
month. We now have 200 Megs of server space and 50 Megs of email server
space--an increase from 40 Megs for storage and 5 Megs for email.
- We have also acquired
three other domain names for our website:
www.alted.us and
www.alted.org which currently point to the CCEANet Home Page, and
www.alted.info that currently points to our CCEANet Research Page
but will ultimately be used for the Electronic Journal for Alternative
Education.
Current Features
- Current Organization
Information
- Newsletters in both html
and pdf (Adobe Acrobat) format
- Council of District
Representatives (CDR) Information
- CCEA District Information
- Lists of State and
District Officers with Contact Information
- Continuation Manuals and
Handbooks
- Historical Continuation
Documents
- Research, Articles, and
Other Documents Related to Continuation Education
- Membership Information
and Ability to Join Online
- State Conference
Information and Forms and Ability to Register Online
- Model
School Information and Forms in Downloadable Format
- Exemplary Programs
Directories, Information and Forms
- Teacher of the Year
Presentation and Contact Information and Applications
- Gifts and Awards
Available to CCEA Members (under construction)
- Online Forum for
Discussion of Current Continuation Issues
- Database (eDirectory of
Schools) Providing Current Information on all Continuation Schools
- Principal Training
Institute Information
- Connections to Other
Education Sites of Interest
- Powerful Site Search
Features
- Online Calendar of Events
- Current Legislative
Information of Interest to Continuation Educators
- Continuation Educator’s
Institute Information and Ability to Register Online
- Continuation Curriculum
Section with Downloadable Materials (in progress)
- Website Table of Contents
- PowerPoint Presentations
Online
- Online Continuation Job
Classifieds (under construction)
- Education Codes for
Continuation Education (in progress)
- Picture Scrapbooks
Possible Future Features
- Electronic Journal for
Alternative Education
- Electronic Newsletter
Subscription
- Electronic Committee
Meetings
Learning by the Bay
[
top ]
2003 CCEA State Conference
Register Now
for the State Conference
It’s not too soon
to submit your registration for this year’s State Conference. Learning by
the Bay promises to be another outstanding CCEA conference. Because this is
the only professional development opportunity designed specifically for
Continuation Educators, you will want to set aside the dates of May 2, 3, 4,
2003 and come to San Francisco. See the enclosed flyer for the most up-to-date
information available on the conference schedule and programs that will be
offered. You may register online or by mailing the enclosed registration form
to Jeanne Yttreness, South Valley High School, 429 Dora, Ukiah, 95428.
If you are
interested in being a presenter at this year’s conference, contact Janet
Knoeppel. You may submit your presenter form online or email
Janet at JanetWK@aol.com. We have a wonderful list of presenters lined up to
share wonderful ideas, strategies and programs with all of you.
The
deadline for presenter submission is December 15, 2002. We look
forward to seeing all of you at the Hyatt Regency San Francisco Airport Hotel.
Call the hotel directly to make your room reservations.
The number is
650-347-1234.
Be sure you ask
for the CCEA Conference room rate.
Continuation Education:
[
top ]
Finding the Facts
New Manual Now
Available
After a year of
planning, discussion, writing and editing CCEA has published a new manual. The
collaborative effort that resulted in Continuation Education: Finding
the Facts was designed to answer the questions, dispel the
myths, and share the facts about Continuation Education. The document has been
sent to every secondary superintendent in California, including County
Superintendents. We have also sent copies to all State Board of Education
members, key individuals in the California Department of Education, politicians
and policy makers throughout the state. The document has also been shared with
the Accrediting Commission (WASC). If you are interested in obtaining a copy of
this manual, contact Janet Knoeppel at
JanetWK@aol.com.
The cost is
$10.00 + $1.75 for mailing.
You may also
order online through our website at
www.cceanet.org.
The Newsletter always needs interesting new
material, so if you have something you would like to say to your
colleagues in the Continuation Education Field -
write it! We reserve the
right to edit all material for form, fit and function. Chances are that your
article will be printed “as is”. Then you can tell your friends that you
have been “Published”.
Pictures of a relevant nature and graphics of all kinds are
likewise encouraged. As mentioned elsewhere, we would like to receive articles
in Word format, since that allows easy insertion into the desk top publishing
program that we use to create the newsletter. Articles can be emailed, or if
that is not a comfortable method for any of you writers, mail a diskette to Nancy Christopher, Secretary. The
address is: Willow Park High School, 21905 Nisqually Road, Apple Valley, CA
92308. Phone: (760) 240-4252 (Work). Email: nchristopher@eee.org
Click Here for more information.
|
