January 14, 2019
CTC works on professional practice solutions,
employee misconduct investigations and more
ACSA CTC Liaison Doug Gephart filed
this report on the most recent meeting of the
Commission on Teacher Credentialing.
Division of Professional Practices
The Committee of Credentials is
comprised of seven members appointed by
the CTC and meet three days each month
at the Commission offices in Sacramento.
Members review allegations of educator
misconduct to determine whether there is
probable cause to recommend discipline.
Prior to 2011, the committee reviewed 45-
50 cases per month. Over the past several
years the caseload for the committee has
risen to an unsustainable amount of more
than 100 cases per month.
In addition to the increase in caseload,
the number of appearances requested by
educators has compelled staff members to
move cases to future meetings thereby de-
laying due process and timely adjudication.
The Commission’s executive director and
general counsel have engaged in conversa-
tions with multiple agencies including the
Office of the Attorney General in order
to identify existing issues and possible
solutions.
1. Issue: The statutory requirement that
only the committee shall make the de-
termination that probable cause exists for
adverse action.
Possible solution: The workload of
the committee could be reduced and its
expertise better directed for both efficiency
and effectiveness, if Division of Professional
Practices staff determined initial probable
cause.
2. Issue: California courts have held that
due process requires that administrative
charges that may result in a license being
revoked, suspended, limited, or conditioned
must be supported by clear and convincing
evidence to a reasonable certainty.
3. Issue: The statutory requirement that
each allegation of an act or omission by an
applicant or credential holder for which
they may be subject to adverse action shall
be presented to the Committee of Creden-
tials has overburdened the committee with
the sheer number of cases it must review
which, in turn, delays the adverse action
process.
4. Issue: The committee’s jurisdiction to
investigate and commence Initial Review
CBO
Continued from page 1
best method to combat them is through
ongoing training for staff who is involved
in the business functions of the district.
Although no CBO admits to possessing
soothsaying abilities, most CBOs utilize
forecasting tools such as the School Ser-
vices Dartboard and the Fiscal Crisis and
Management Team’s LCFF Calculator to
assist with forecasting out-year revenues, so
that a district or COE budget does not be-
come fiscally overcommitted. Despite these
forecasting tools, all CBOs experience a
gut-check when making any large fiscal
obligations that could potentially affect a
district’s future fiscal solvency.
In good years when there are plenty of
dollars coming from Sacramento, people
think that the CBO’s job is easier because
there are dollars to alleviate every request,
but in actuality it’s harder. What makes it
tough for CBOs is that they must contin-
ually balance growing fiscal demands while
preparing for future revenue reductions for
which they have no control.
Training underlies the success of the
school business office. School districts
have plenty of reasons for not promoting
business services training, including travel,
registration expenses, the loss in hours,
and finding desk coverage. Nevertheless,
districts that do not have ongoing train-
ing for business staff find themselves with
problems relating to filling openings and
the district’s overall fiscal health. As Henry
Ford says, “The only thing worse than
training your employees and having them
is severely limited to just six categories of
documents: 1) official records of arrest, 2)
affidavits signed under penalty of perjury by
those with personal knowledge, 3) reports
from employing school districts of final
employment actions while allegations of
misconduct are pending or due to alle-
gations of misconduct, 4) notice from an
employer of a complaint of sexual mis-
conduct coupled with a declaration under
penalty of perjury evidencing personal
knowledge of the sexual misconduct, 5) no-
tices of contract abandonment, use of pupil
data for business purposes, reports of false
fiscal expenditures, subversion or attempt-
ed subversion of licensing exams, and 6)
disclosure or failure to disclose a conviction,
licensing action, or pending criminal or
licensing investigation on an application to
the Commission.
The Attorney General’s office staff have
suggested that the CTC could seek to
amend the current statutory and regulatory
scheme to address these concerns, including
broadening the Commission’s jurisdiction
under Education Code section 44242.5. allegations of credential holder misconduct,
saving the Commission both time and
financial resources.
Employee misconduct investigations Access to consistent data elements
from all institutions and programs is an
important part of the new accreditation
system. Data collection is now much more
extensive and thorough as result of the
implementation of CTC data system that
will provide greater detail for program
enrollment, pathways offered, and length of
program. This also includes outcomes data
for candidates, employer and field experi-
ence supervisor surveys, and performance
assessment results. Discrepancies identified
through data rather than interpreted from
anecdotal response from institutions.
Embedded within the backlog of case-
loads for the Committee on Professional
Practices is the disparity, lack of thorough-
ness, and inconsistencies in investigating
alleged employee misconduct. Consequent-
ly the CTC staff and the Attorney Gener-
al’s office must complete any deficiencies
in the investigative process to ensure due
process for the credential holder and justify
any adverse action taken by the Commis-
sion and/or the Attorney General’s office.
Recognizing the need for greater efficien-
cies, ACSA Legislative Advocate Laura
Preston and Doug Gephart, ACSA Liaison
to the Commission on Teacher Credential-
ing are initiating discussions with staff from
the Attorney General’s Office to develop
detailed investigation guidelines that could
be shared uniformly with school district
human resources staff. In addition, it may
be possible for staff from the Attorney
General’s office to work with ACSA to
conduct training sessions for appropriate
district staff. Successful development of the
investigation guidelines and subsequent
training could have a significant influence
on minimizing delays in adjudicating
leave is not training them and having them
stay…”
Look in any school administration
magazine and there are plenty of adver-
tisements for school business professionals,
because it’s difficult finding experience and
know-how. Unlike the certificated ranks
whereby a teaching credential indicates that
the applicant possesses certain skills for
the position as a condition of employment,
the school business field does not have that
entrance requirement.
Subsequently, school districts find
themselves hiring applicants from outside
industries who can flip their brains from
public accounting to government account-
ing. Unfortunately, these candidates are not
well versed in the tenets and processes that
keep a school district fiscally solvent. The
upshot is that without the business office
establishing and maintaining sound school
business practices for effective communi-
cation, sound budget development, budget
monitoring, ASB accounting, cash moni-
toring, and ADA accounting, the district
finds itself with the “problem” of fiscal
health.
Over the course of the last three years,
the San Luis Obispo County Office of
Education has partnered with ACSA and
the California Association of School Busi-
ness Officials by holding two 9-18 month
Chief Business Official training academies,
with a third program starting last Octo-
ber. SLOCOE hosts these academies to
allow school administrators and office staff
interested in school business to improve the
business functions in their district, promote
practices that contribute to their district’s
fiscal health, and allow for employee pro-
EDCAL 3
FROM THE
Executive
Director
Committee on Accreditation revised
process
Accreditation is an essential compo-
nent of the educator preparation process
as it assures candidates and the public that
programs are of high quality and meet state
standards for professional preparation. Ad-
ditionally, accreditation provides evidence
that each institution is accountable for the
quality and effectiveness of their programs.
The accreditation system is the primary
means by which the CTC ensures quali-
ty in educator preparation in California.
Accreditation is a multi-step review process
implemented in phases over a two-year
period of time to ensure a rigorous and
thorough review to validate institutional
compliance of Commission standards and
expectations. A summary of the review
process includes but is not limited to the
following:
Annual data submission
Program review
Under the new Program Review process,
each credential program provides specif-
ic required evidence or documentation
demonstrating to the extent their programs
are aligned to each of the Commission
program standards for each credential area.
To ensure transparency, a subset of experts
that reviewed Program Review submissions
serves as site visit team members. Common
Standards reviewed in the spring to identify
key issues allowing institutions time to re-
See CTC, page 8
fessional growth and confidence in school
business. Business offices with well-trained
staff allows for promotional tracks such
that when openings occur, there is not a
scramble to fill the position with a school
business neophyte, as there is a trained staff
member ready to take the position. Addi-
tionally, business staff have the opportunity
to train for their next job in their existing
job, reducing the invisible force of “job
entitlement.”
One tenet that we have in the SLO-
COE Business Division is that to work in
this department, an applicant must possess
two traits; the first is that they cannot be
a human hater, and the second is that the
applicant has to be smarter than me. The
easiest way to become smart in school busi-
ness is enrolling in any ACSA or CASBO
school business program offered at SLO-
COE or other surrounding county offices
of education.
Despite the challenges, all CBOs look
forward to LCAP development in order
to make future expenditures realistic and
sustainable. Any CBO needs to know
upcoming program demands well before
LCAP budget development such that those
needs are addressed in a systematic, solvent
and sustainable fashion so every student
benefits.
Keep all of this in mind when working
with your district CBO during budget and
LCAP development. It is not the present
that keeps CBOs awake at night, but rather
the future.
Sheldon Smith is ACSA’s 2018 School
Business Administrator of the Year.
It’s fair to say that early
childhood education
serves as an incredible launch point
for the future of our students. From
lower rates of incarceration to college
and career readiness, early childhood
education has proven to be a differ-
ence-maker in many communities.
Gov. Gavin Newsom is pushing for an
expansion of early childhood education
by dedicating budget dollars to grow
the program and create more spaces
for low-income families and eligible
children. One of his first initiatives will
focus on the state preschool program,
which is one element of early childhood
education.
Given our new governor’s commitment
to early childhood education, I was
excited to be invited to attend the Early
Learning Legislative Tour of the East
Coast sponsored by Assembly member
Kevin McCarty, First 5 LA, and Early
Edge California. We were joined on the
tour by representatives from CDE, CTA,
the Early Learning Lab, First 5 CA and
Superintendent of Public Instruction
Tony Thurmond as we visited high-qual-
ity preschool programs in Boston, New
Jersey, and New York City. The tour
objective was “to inform legislators
about the best practices of high-quality
Early Learning programs.”
What stood out most to tour partici-
pants was the quality of the programs
and full commitment of the state or
cities to these programs. Specifically,
quality outcomes were due, in large
part, to a well-qualified, appropriate-
ly-compensated workforce; high-qual-
ity, intentional curriculum; small class
sizes and lower student to adult ratios;
effective training, coaching and sup-
port; wraparound services provided by
community-based organizations; and
effective leadership.
The full commitment was evident in
their funding levels and commitment
to compensating educators for higher
qualifications. Boston and New Jersey
spend $15,000 annually per child and
New York City spends $12,500 annually
per student. Boston requires a bache-
lor of arts plus a master’s (within five
years of hire) and New Jersey and New
York City require bachelor of arts with
certification in ECE; all of them pay at
parity with K-12 teachers.
Their outcomes are impressive. Studies
in Boston have demonstrated a signifi-
cant positive impact of the program on
student achievement and social-emo-
tional development through fifth grade.
The National Institute for Early Educa-
tion Research found that the effects
of two years in their program have
contributed to the closure of half of the
achievement gap between students
from low- and high-income families.
A study by Westat found that children
participating in New York City’s Pre-K
for All program have shown significant
gains in executive functioning and ac-
ademic skills across all income levels,
races, and home language statuses.
ACSA will continue to work with
members and experts to appropriately
advocate for the early learning initia-
tives that will help California public
schools demonstrate similar success-
es, without further dividing our already
inappropriately low funding.
– Wesley Smith
Executive Director