Standard 1: A School System is Able to Demonstrate Its Control of Resources, Programs, and Personnel
- Finding 1.1: Board policies are inadequate to direct effective curriculum management and control.
- Finding 1.2: Fragmented, system-wide planning at the District and school site levels does not provide focus for sound system management.
- Finding 1.3: The Table of Organization does not meet audit criteria for sound management of the School District. Some job descriptions are outdated, do not meet criteria, and are not aligned with the Table of Organization.
- Finding 1.4: The Teacher Appraisal System is aligned with the California State Standards for the Teaching Profession, but is ineffective in providing constructive feedback to many teachers.
Standard 2: A School System has Established Clear and Valid Objectives for Students
- Finding 2.1: The District has no comprehensive curriculum management plan to provide direction for the design, delivery, and evaluation of curriculum.
- Finding 2.2: The scope of the written curriculum is adequate at the elementary level, but inadequate at the middle and high school levels to guide teaching.
- Finding 2.3: The quality of curriculum guides is inadequate to promote alignment of the written, taught, and tested curricula.
Standard 3: A School System Demonstrates Internal Connectivity and Rational Equity in its Program Development and Implementation
- Finding 3.1: Professional development is not coordinated system-wide, and no comprehensive District-wide staff development plan exists.
- Finding 3.2: Inconsistency in the delivery of bilingual programs impedes the mastery of standards for which English learners are held accountable.
- Finding 3.3: Guidance regarding expected instructional practices is implicit and informal; observed practices reflected high reliance on direct instruction with large group activity and student seat work.
- Finding 3.4: Curriculum monitoring practices by principals lack consistency for the purpose of aligning curriculum, instruction, and assessment to improve student achievement.
- Finding 3.5: Some District and school practices have created inequalities and inequities that impede attainment of improved student learning and high achievement for all students.
Standard 4: A School System Uses the Results from System-Designed and/or Adopted Assessments to Adjust, Improve, or Terminate Ineffective Practices or Programs
- Finding 4.1: The District lacks a comprehensive assessment and evaluation plan to guide curriculum and program decision-making.
- Finding 4.2: The scope of assessment meets audit criteria for adequacy in English / language arts and mathematics, but is inadequate to monitor student achievement and promote achievement in other curricular areas.
- Finding 4.3: Assessment results do not show consistent improvement, and gaps in achievement among student groups are evident.
Standard 5: School System has Improved Productivity
- Finding 5.1: Facilities master planning lacks important design features and is inadequate to guide facility development. Most school facilities are clean and well-maintained, but crowded.
- Finding 5.2: The fiscal resources are managed prudently; however, budget practices lack adequate linkages to curricular needs and priorities.
- Finding 5.3: Program interventions to improve student achievement are not systematically planned, monitored, and evaluated for long-term effectiveness.
- Finding 5.4: The Technology Plan is inadequate to guide implementation of the Technology Program. Some computer-based instructional programs are used, but the integration of technology into the curriculum is minimal.