Archive for the ‘Education’ Category

Contra Costa Community College District students get access to online courses statewide

Wednesday, November 24th, 2021

Source: California Community Colleges

By Timothy Leong, PIO, 4CD

Contra Costa Community College District (4CD) colleges — Contra Costa College, Diablo Valley College and its San Ramon Campus, and Los Medanos College and its Brentwood Center — are among the first 15 colleges in the state to become Teaching Colleges on the California Virtual Campus – Online Education Initiative (CVC-OEI) Exchange cross-enrollment platform. CVC-OEI is designed to ensure more students are able to successfully complete their educational goals and achieve their higher education degree or certificate by increasing access to and success in high-quality online courses.

4CD students can now quickly enroll in online courses offered at other eligible community colleges in the state without completing another college application, and vice versa. In addition, transcripts and financial aid are also coordinated to streamline these processes for students.

“If students can’t find the class they need that suits their schedule at their own campus, the CVC-OEI Exchange provides an easy and seamless way for them take a course online at other community colleges in the system,” says 4CD Dean of Distance Education Joanna Miller. “This expanded access to online classes will ultimately help our students complete their educational goals and advance more quickly toward their careers or 4-year colleges.”

The CVC-OEI is a collaborative project among California’s community colleges and is funded by a grant disbursed by the California Community College Chancellor’s Office. CCC and DVC have been members of the CVC Consortium since 2018, with Los Medanos College joining in 2020. For more information about the CVC-OEI, visit https://cvc.edu/about-the-oei/ or contact Andrea Hanstein at ahanstein@cvc.edu.

About 4CD

The Contra Costa Community College District is one of the largest multi-college community college districts in California. The 4CD serves a population of 1,159,540 people, and its boundaries encompass all but 48 of the 734-square-mile land area of Contra Costa County. 4CD is home to Contra Costa College in San Pablo, Diablo Valley College in Pleasant Hill, Los Medanos College in Pittsburg, as well as educational centers in Brentwood and San Ramon. The District headquarters is located in downtown Martinez. For more information visit www.4cd.edu.

 

 

Kiwanis Delta-Antioch club to hold 4th Annual Holiday Run virtually

Sunday, November 21st, 2021

https://runsignup.com/Race/CA/KiwanisHolidayRun

Contra Costa College District COVID-19 vaccine mandate for staff, students now in effect

Saturday, November 20th, 2021

Photo source: CDC

Unanimous vote by trustees; all visitors, including vendors and subcontractors, required to complete health assessment prior to visiting a 4CD facility.

By Timothy Leung, Public Information Officer, Contra Costa Community College District

At their September 8, 2021, meeting, the Contra Costa Community College District (4CD) Governing Board passed a resolution on a unanimous vote establishing a COVID-19 vaccine requirement for all employees, and students who attend at least one in-person class or visits a 4CD facility or campus. All visitors, including vendors and subcontractors, are strongly encouraged to be vaccinated and will be required to complete a health assessment prior to visiting a 4CD facility. Ward 2 Trustee and Board Vic President Dr. Walters made the motion, and it was seconded by Ward 5 Trustee Fernando Sandoval. The vote was unanimous, including the student trustee. (See Item 21.A.)

The vaccine requirement became effective on Monday, November 1, 2021, in order to provide time for those currently unvaccinated to become fully vaccinated. The 4CD Governing Board determined that requiring vaccines for students and employees is necessary to ensure the health and safety of the 4CD community.

Employees and students can apply for a vaccination exception or deferral in the following situations: (a) medical excuse from receiving COVID-19 vaccine due to medical conditions or precaution; b) disability; (c) during the period of any pregnancy; or (d) religious objection based on a person’s sincerely held religious beliefs, practice or observance. When an exception or deferral has been approved, regular weekly COVID-19 testing with evidence of negative test results will be required for any unvaccinated person accessing District campuses or facilities.

4CD is evaluating various technology solutions that will track the vaccination status and test results in a secure system designed to protect the privacy of students and employees in accordance with applicable laws.

“In making this decision, 4CD reached out to its students, faculty, classified professionals, and managers and received overwhelming support to take this action,” said Chancellor Bryan Reece. “COVID-19 and its many variants will be with us for a while, so we must take prudent steps like this one so we can continue providing face-to-face instruction and services for our students, while ensuring we have a safe place to learn and work for our students and staff.”

4CD continues to monitor and adhere to health guidelines from federal, state and local health authorities, and advocates vaccination is the most effective way to prevent transmission and limit COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths.

Visit 4CD’s website at https://www.4cd.edu/covid19/index.html for more information.

About the College District

The Contra Costa Community College District (4CD) is one of the largest multi-college community college districts in California. The 4CD serves a population of 1,019,640 people, and its boundaries encompass all but 48 of the 734-square-mile land area of Contra Costa County. 4CD is home to Contra Costa College in San Pablo, Diablo Valley College in Pleasant Hill, Los Medanos College in Pittsburg, as well as educational centers in Brentwood and San Ramon. The District headquarters is located in downtown Martinez. For more information visit www.4cd.edu.

Letters: Householder recall proponent refutes what was said in KPIX report

Friday, November 5th, 2021

Ellie Householder during a KPIX TV interview on October 31, 2021. Video screenshot

“She brought us all together, many of us strangers just one month ago, to form a united effort to demand better leadership for our students.  We are not frightened, divided, or ‘old Antioch.’”

Lindsey Amezcua during KPIX TV interview on Oct. 31, 2021. Video screenshot

For the past 18-months, as America dealt with the impact of COVID-19 which impacted every decision we made from homelife to work to traveling and education to shutdowns, often what went unchecked by the news stations was what was going on with decisions and actions of our local elected officials.

As COVID19 gripped America, this deadly and divisive pandemic provided a cover for an arguably more insidious and detrimental “virus” raging unchecked; political activists with inflated egos and grandiose ideas of their own importance and impact. Antioch has not escaped unscathed in this political arena.

Antioch Unified School Board (AUSD) President Ellie Householder stated her “Progressive ideas frighten people” and that is why citizens began the arduous effort to recall her.  On the surface this is a powerful and persuasive argument, implying that she is working hard for the students of AUSD and recall proponents are unwilling to accept her ideas.

Is this really the case?

Ms. Householder was voted in as president by her fellow trustees in December of 2020.  Since taking on this role she has presided over 24 meetings of the Board of Education, including 7 special meetings.

In these meetings there have been 57 agenda items under the category Items for Information/Discussion/Action by Board. Of these 57 items, 26 of them were brought forward by Ms. Householder.

  • District-wide Use of Force Policies and Procedures (Householder) 09/02/2021 & 10/27/2021
  • Policy Regarding Law Enforcement Interaction with Students (Householder) 10/27/2021
  • Bullying Prevention Policy (Householder) 10/27/2021
  • Agenda Setting/Organization (Householder) 01/27/2021 & 10/27/2021
  • Public Communication Policy (Householder) 9/8/2021
  • Early Education Options (Householder) 9/8/2021
  • Review of Inter- and Intra-District Transfer Board Policies (Householder) 9/8/2021
  • Board of Education Notification Policies and Procedures (Householder) 9/8/2021
  • Data Supports (Householder) 02/24/2021 & 8/25/2021
  • Bay Area Community Resources (BACR) Presentation (Householder) 8/11/2021
  • Graduation Attire (Householder) 6/23/2021
  • Out and About” Report (Householder) 6/9/2021
  • Cleaner Contra Costa Challenge (Householder) 04/28/2021 & 5/12/2021
  • Special Board Recognitions (Householder) 5/12/2021
  • Bicycle Garden Presentation to the Board (Householder) 5/12/2021
  • District-wide Mission Statement(s) (Householder) 4/28/2021
  • District Logo (Householder) 4/28/2021
  • Manhood Development Program Updates (Householder) 3/10/2021
  • Change Order Reports Provided by Staff to the Board (Householder) 3/10/2021
  • School Reopening (Householder) 3/10/2021
  • School Safety (Householder) 2/24/2021
  • Highlighting Resolutions for the Month (Householder) 2/24/2021
  • Single Board Email Address (Householder) 12/16/2020 & 1/13/2021
  • Goldman School of Public Policy Graduate Student Research Proposal (Householder) 12/16/2020 & 1/13/2021
  • Board Meeting Protocols (Householder) 1/13/2021

Of the items presented, which progressive ideas frighten us as Ms. Householder claims? Furthermore, of these items, which actually have a direct impact on improving student achievement? I can see none. She focuses on test scores as she belittles the district. I can see no agenda item she brought forward that would improve test scores.

Meanwhile, other trustees have highlighted the digital divide, pushed for cultural inclusion, requested ROTC and JROTC programs, and sought out grant writing options. There are countless other examples.

What does Householder propose? She has three times pushed for a single board email address, twice discussed the Cleaner Contra Costa Challenge, discussed the city’s bicycle garden initiative, focused on old data, and a variety of other items that have no impact on our students.

We aren’t frightened by her progressive ideas; we are terrified by her lack of discernible action. She has provided a lot of words and media interviews but, has provided the district little to no substance with actual action.

It is interesting that for a sound bite in a recent KPIX interview, she calls herself the “most hated person in America” but fails to see we do not hate her, we dislike her leadership style which by her own admittance is “heavy handed”. Most importantly, her heavy-handed leadership has failed to focus on the students while instead attacking school leadership, employees and even parents.

Many of us who support the recall effort initially supported her for election because of how she was going to change the district. Seeing her in action, now we just want a trustee with a focus on the students and our children – not a personal vendetta.

During these same 24 meetings, the discussion to evaluate/fire the superintendent took place on six separate occasions, including twice under the guise of an emergency Special Board Meeting.  Evaluating the superintendent was seemingly important to Ms. Householder, but she failed to complete one of the primary duties of the president; the coordination and completion of the formal evaluation of the superintendent, due annually on June 30th.

Instead, her laser focus to discredit and fire the superintendent has wasted the time of the other trustees and staff, taken resources away from the students, and illustrated that the priority of her tenure as a board member and president is not focused on our students.

In that KPIX 5 interview she claims her reckless and biased behavior isn’t “dividing anybody” and the “folks behind this recall effort represent old Antioch.”  This very statement is divisive and creates an US v THEM narrative that is completely false.

There is no old or new, there is just Antioch. She also fails to remember that AUSD also encompasses part of the city of Oakley and City of Pittsburg.

The recall proponents represent all areas of AUSD and the diversity of our district.  We are grandparents, parents, recent graduates, teachers, staff, coaches, and administrators.  Our age range spans many decades from teenagers to those in their 90’s. We are members of all three AUSD unions, across all schools and cities within AUSD boundaries. We represent AUSD.

In the interview, Ms. Householder got one thing correct.  She stated, “I believe that I’m actually bringing people together” and this is true.

She brought us all together, many of us strangers just one month ago, to form a united effort to demand better leadership for our students.  We are not frightened, divided, or “old Antioch.”

#WeAreAUSD and we hope to see you at a signing location this weekend or in the near future.

Website: https://recallelliehouseholder.com/

Facebook: Recall Ellie Householder

Twitter: RecallEllieHH

Instagram: recall_elliehouseholder

Lindsey Amezcua

Community member, AUSD parent, Recall proponent, and advocate for ALL children.

 

Signature gathering for recall of Antioch School Board president begins

Thursday, October 28th, 2021

Householder does not provide response for petition, won’t say why

Effort has until April 6, 2022 to gather 9,913 signatures of voters in the district

By Allen Payton

Following receipt of a letter from the Contra Costa Elections office, on Wednesday, approving the petition to recall Antioch School Board President Ellie Householder, one of the leaders of the effort, Lindsey Amezcua said signature gathering has begun. HouseholderRecallPetitionApprovalLetter

Householder was served on Friday, Oct. 8 with the notice of intent to circulate the recall petition, and it was submitted to the county on Tuesday, Oct. 12. Householder then had seven days to provide a response, of up to 200 words, to the reasons given on the petition for the recall. But Amezcua said she did not provide one. (See related article)

Then the notice had to be published in a local newspaper, which was done in the East Bay Times on Friday, Oct. 22. The necessary paperwork was then submitted to the county elections office that same day.  A minor correction had to be made to the paperwork, which was submitted on Tuesday, Oct. 26, Amezcua explained.

The effort included gathering signatures at Wednesday’s school board meeting. Amezcua announced it during public comments at the beginning of the regular meeting.

They will also be gathering signatures during the Rivertown Trick or Treat event in downtown on Saturday, and will be in front of grocery stores, have them available in a variety of businesses, as well as door-to-door directly to voters, she shared.

According to the letter from the county elections office, the effort has 160 days, until April 5, 2022, to gather “not less than 9,913 valid signatures of properly registered voters in the Antioch Unified School District at large”. That’s based on 15% of the total 66,087 voters in the district.

“That’s more than who voted for her in 2018,” Amezcua pointed out. According to the election results, Householder received 8,705 votes when she was elected that year, placing second behind Mary Rocha who received 13,148 votes.

Questions were sent late Wednesday afternoon to Householder asking why she didn’t submit a response, if she missed the seven-day deadline, and if she didn’t care to defend herself, or if she doesn’t consider the recall a serious matter. But she did not respond as of publication time Thursday afternoon.

For more information visit www.RecallEllieHouseholder.com.

Please check back later for any updates to this response.

Antioch School Board censure of Householder fails with Lewis abstaining

Wednesday, October 27th, 2021

During Wednesday night’s school board meeting in the Deer Valley High School theater AUSD teachers and staff wore shirts with the words “You are not Recognized” mocking Householder for her comments to Trustee Mary Rocha and Superintendent Stephanie Anello at a previous board meeting.

Wanted to discuss hiring a board consultant, first; board agrees to hire consultant to help with governance and evaluating the superintendent

By Allen Payton

Antioch School Board Trustee Mary Rocha moved forward with her effort to censure Board President Ellie Householder, also at the request of leaders of the recall against the embattled trustee, during the board meeting, Wednesday night. Their first in-person meeting in 20 months was held at the Deer Valley High School theater.

“From the time you were voted onto the school board you have been nothing but disruptive,” Rocha said reading prepared remarks, offering her reasons for the censure vote. “You encouraged protesters who tried to intimidate a council member to vote a certain way.  In fact, not only did you encourage it you participated in the protest.”

“You encouraged a protest at the Antioch district office which resulted in some of your friends breaking into the building, destroying district facilities and pushing and shoving that resulted in two board members and one employee getting injured,” she continued. “You were censured for further encouraging friends to intimidate board members in order to push your agenda. You posted and applauded your friends on social media for screaming ‘f… Gary’, ‘f… Mary’, ‘f… Diane’, repeatedly.”

“You participated in a taped forum when the moderator spent over an hour saying horrible things about our superintendent, many which were lies, and rather than correct him or offer the truth you said, ‘I like where this is going’,” Rocha stated. “Most recently you posted a video on your social media that included the faces of our students and insinuated staff had mistreated the student, yet you never asked about the facts.  If I were the parent, I would be furious.”

“Finally, you call a ridiculous special meeting asking the superintendent to violate employee and students’ privacy rights as well as board policy. You continue to call special meetings requesting an attorney and when speaking with staff costing the district money,” she added.

Rocha then made a motion to return with a formal vote to censure Householder. Trustee Gary Hack seconded the motion.

Public comments were then heard, most of them in support of the censure of Householder and three who spoke against it. Several district teachers, staff and other members of the public in the audience wore shirts with the words “You are not Recognized” mocking Householder for what she had said to both Rocha and Superintendent Stephanie Anello when they tried to speak during a previous board meeting. (See related article)

“During board meetings there is no dictator. I think Ellie should stay away from social media…and study up on Robert’s Rules of Order. That might be a better use of her time,” said Teacher of the Year Crystal Van Dyke.

“Trustee Rocha is not acting alone,” said Lindsey Amezcua, who is one of the recall leaders.

“This biweekly decent into nonsense,” said another speaker describing the board meetings in opposition to the vote to censure.

Willie Mims said, “I’m totally against this. You should look into the mirror and ask did you respect this young lady? No, you did not. I’m up here to support Ellie Householder.”

“There’s so much to unpack with this,” Householder said. “We don’t really have a policy on this. I just don’t think this belongs on our school board. I don’t think this should be a discussion we should have, here. We’re not in the business of punishing each other.”

“I call for the vote,” Rocha said.

“It’s an unpopular and uncomfortable situation when you’re talking about punishing someone,” Board Vice President Clyde Lewis said. He compared the experience of a young man he’s been mentoring and had “been counted out. But with the proper support…he’s going on to college.”

“This is a conversation. There is validity to the feelings of those who support the censure,” District 1 Trustee Antonio Hernandez said. “There have been a number of comments about coming together and working together as a board. Some of our best moments have been during closed session. I wish we could share those with the public. There are some deep issues on this board that we need to work through.”

“It’s not in good faith that we censure someone on the board and then deal with hiring a board consultant. If we censure her, we still have to work with her,” he continued. “It’s just so hard to untangle things and it’s hard…when we accidentally mix in the more personal things. The best that I can say, I hear you.”

“I think I’ve made it very clear,” said Rocha. “You’ve used your media…you’ve criticized our staff…I’ve brought things and I’ve been ignored.” She also mentioned Householder posting the video of the student being held down by security and Antioch police officers at Antioch High School, last month.

“Your chairmanship has not been a positive one,” Rocha continued. “I admired you when you were a trustee. I don’t admire your tactics because you put yourself above us. This has been an issue that has been brewing and brewing.”

“I do understand that my leadership style is sometimes heavy handed at times,” Householder said. “But…this board has gotten way off the rails…with the district leading this board…and I’m not going to apologize for it.”

“The part about the video, that’s totally valid,” she said. “It seems like every time we disagree it becomes like really extreme with removal or a censure.”

Householder then asked community member Melissa Case, who had spoken out from the audience several times, to “please leave. You keep having these outbursts” and asked for security to remove her.

“I really have to caution…it has to be a substantial disruption that prevents the board from doing its work,” said Superintendent Stephanie Anello. Householder dropped the matter and Case remained at the meeting.

“I just think my leadership style just doesn’t resonate with the board. But I don’t think I have been disrespectful of other board members,” Householder continued, speaking about the censure vote. “After the last censure…I changed. It’s been a month since this happened (referring to her posting of the video of the student being detained).”

The vote then failed on a 2-2-1 vote with Lewis voting to abstain, to which groans could be heard from those in the audience.

“I think that this conversation should happen after we discuss having a consultant,” Lewis explained.

“When you became the chair it changed you,” Rocha added, speaking to Householder. “I’m willing to have a consultant. But I wanted to clear the air and have the public understand what it’s like for you to be the chair.”

Board Consultant

After discussing three individuals to be hired as a consultant to assist the board in governance and the evaluation of the superintendent, the board members agreed to hire one and gave direction to Anello to do so. The board will make a final hiring decision during a future meeting.

Antioch School Board approves $30.5 million plan for federal Emergency Relief funds, Householder abstains

Wednesday, October 27th, 2021

Will be used to address students’ academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs, as well as the opportunity gaps that existed before, and were exacerbated by, COVID-19

By Allen Payton

During their meeting on Wednesday, October 27, 2021, the Antioch School Board approved an expenditure plan for $30.5 million in federal Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) funds on a 4-0-1 vote with Board President Ellie Householder voting to abstain. ESSER III Expenditure Plan Presentation

According to the district staff report, all school districts that receive ESSER funds under the American Rescue Plan, referred to as ESSER III funds, are required to develop an Expenditure Plan for how ESSER III funds will be used to address students’ academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs, as well as the opportunity gaps that existed before, and were exacerbated by, the COVID-19 pandemic.

AUSD staff participated “in meaningful stakeholder engagement to solicit input in the development of the plan”. Antioch Unified is due to receive $30,531,253 in ESSER III funds. Under the terms of ESSER III, a plan must be approved by the Board of Education and presented to the County Office of Education by October 31, 2021.

It was that tight timeframe and short notice, and because the information wasn’t also provided in Spanish, which Householder gave as reasons she didn’t want to vote on the plan.

Expenditure Plan Overview

According to the details of the Expenditure Plan, $12.25 million will be used to implement strategies for continuous and safe in-person learning; almost $9 million will be spent to address the academic impact of lost instructional time; $4.5 million to recruit and retain staff; and $4.8 million for facilities improvements and repairs.

The ESSER III funds may be expended during the period of March 1, 2020, through September 30, 2024. According to staff, no funds were expended prior to the creation and approval of the plan presented at the meeting.

 

Antioch School Board holds closed session for performance evaluation of superintendent but takes no action

Wednesday, October 27th, 2021

The Antioch Unified School Board held their first in-person meeting in 20 months inside the Deer Valley High School theater on Wednesday, Oct. 27, 2021. Video screenshot.

Rocha attempted to table it; Householder consults with district’s attorney, says use of performancevaluation is “kind of a catch all term”

Large police presence in parking lot for beginning of meeting.

Seven Antioch police officers and six cars were in the parking lot of Deer Valley High during the beginning of the Antioch School Board meeting Wednesday night, Oct. 27, 2021.

By Allen Payton

Before the Antioch School Board could go into closed session to discuss the performance evaluation of Superintendent Stephanie Anello-Cantando, Trustee Mary Rocha made a motion to table the matter and fellow Trustee Gary Hack seconded it. But the motion died on a 2-3 vote.

The meeting was held in the Deer Valley High School theater, so that the board and staff members could socially distance and with the expectation of a larger than usual turnout. It was the first in-person meeting in 20 months and the first one ever for Board Vice President Clyde Lewis and Area 1 Trustee Antonio Hernandez, Board President Ellie Householder pointed out.

A police presence of seven Antioch officers and six vehicles was in the parking lot before and during the closed session, and the beginning of the regular meeting. Asked if something had happened at the school, one of the officers replied “we’re here to make sure something doesn’t”. They had left by about 8:00 p.m.

First, a few public comments were heard all in support of Anellog, including from Teacher of the Year Crystal Van Dyke who spoke in favor of “a glowing evaluation” for the superintendent. “She shouldn’t even be evaluated on test scores. Teachers aren’t evaluated on test scores,” Van Dyke added.

“Why are we really having this evaluation?” asked Velma Wilson. “Ellie, what really have you done?” She then gave a list of negative things she claims Householder has done.

“You need to step down,” Wilson concluded.

Rocha then made her motion to table. Although no discussion is to be held on a motion to table, Householder allowed it.

Asked by Hernandez if it was a motion to table or postpone, Rocha responded, “We’re tabling this. To not come back.”

“Why should we be doing a closed session evaluation when we have on the agenda on 12.E. a consultant to help us? Rocha asked, offering her reason for the motion.

“We are tabling it because it mirrors the conversation of 12.E.?” Lewis asked for clarification.

“Yes,” Rocha replied.

“So, what I will say is they are different. There’s two entirely separate things,” Householder said. “After consulting with our district’s attorney this is what he suggested and it’s kind of a catch all term.”

“Regardless of what you’re saying I’m still tabling it. So, if you’d please take the vote,” Rocha said.

The vote failed with only Hack and Rocha voting yes. The board then adjourned into closed session at 6:20 p.m.

When they returned from closed session at about 7:20, Householder said, according to the agenda she didn’t have to report out but, did state “there was no reportable action”.

While the meeting continued, questions were sent via email to all five trustees asking if the closed session really wasn’t the annual performance evaluation of the superintendent, why wasn’t one done in June as is required by her contract, and when will it be held, this year?

Please check back later for any updates to this report.