A review of some of California’s largest school districts shows that fewer than half even mention the new science standards adopted by the state nearly two years ago in their Local Control and Accountability Plans, which they are required to draw up as a result of school reforms championed by Gov. Jerry Brown.
Assemblywoman Susan Bonilla, D-Concord, authored AB 706 to establish a California STEM AmeriCorps or CalSTEM program, that would expand on President Barack Obama’s STEM AmeriCorps initiative by allowing the California Volunteers office to administer it and solicit private funds to operate it. The bill, which was approved by the Assembly on Monday, would also allow nonprofits to apply to host CalSTEM AmeriCorps members and defines their qualifications.
As millions of California students tackle new assessments aligned with the Common Core, Gov. Jerry Brown in one of his more expansive comments on testing and measurements last week called for a “balanced” approach to testing, and expressed skepticism about pressures to hold schools more accountable for achieving results, and on students to show constant improvement.
Thwarted at the Capitol – and on the ballot – a coalition of advocates working to overhaul the state’s low-ranking public schools increasingly have turned to the courts in search of more favorable outcomes. Current cases center on the effect of tenure and dismissal rules on students and the fees teachers pay to their unions.
“Those who rationalize California’s persistently low levels of academic achievement, as measured by graduation rates and national test scores – especially the California Teachers Association – usually blame a supposed lack of money. . . What makes the rationale even weaker is that graduation rates show absolutely no correlation with spending, and that syndrome is most evident in viewing California vis-à-vis archrival Texas. “
“Early next week, we plan to release our multiyear budget outlook that will include our assessment of the Governor’s revenue and spending estimates. Tentatively, our revenue estimates are a few billion dollars higher than the administration’s new estimates for the 2015-16 fiscal year. Our initial calculations suggest that most of these higher revenues will be consumed by higher spending requirements for schools and community colleges under Proposition 98 and higher budget reserve and debt payment requirements under Proposition 2. Our revenue estimates would, however, leave the Legislature with more money for additional reserves, debt payments, or new budget commitments. . . . We are clearly on the upward slope of the state’s revenue roller coaster. But just as the state’s revenue picture has improved significantly over just a few months, it can just as easily reverse course with a stock market or economic downturn. There is little indication that such a downturn will occur soon, but as we discussed in our November Fiscal Outlook, such slumps can occur with little warning. Restraint in approving new ongoing programs is key to preventing an unsustainable spending base. . . . If the Legislature adopts our revenue estimates, we advise caution in committing to new ongoing spending programs or tax reductions.”
The agreement announced Thursday as part of Brown’s revised budget resolves a months-long standoff between Napolitano and the governor over the university’s finances that had California students and their families worried about the rising cost of a UC education. The deal, which still would allow the 10-campus system to increase tuition for non-residents and students pursuing professional degrees, must be approved by lawmakers.
With state revenues growing faster than previously expected, Brown said Thursday that he wants to pay down $436 million in UC’s pension debts over the next three years and boost spending by $3,000 for each of the state’s 6 million K-12 students. Additional money will also be given to public schools with large numbers of low-income students.
The push back from schools hit with a huge CalSTRS rate increase, expected to be an additional $3.7 billion a year when fully phased in, is not that it’s unaffordable and will hurt students or unfairly lets the state and teachers off the hook. . . As it stands now, school districts would have to pay for the CalSTRS rate increase with money from a new K-12 funding plan adopted two years ago, the Local Control Funding Formula.
While supporters view charters as an effective means to help kids circumvent some of the poorest-performing public schools, the teachers’ unions argue charters have unfair advantages. So the California Teachers Association has sponsored a package of bills designed to “level the playing field” or hobble charter schools with bureaucracy — depending on one’s perspective.
The legislation doesn’t pick a spot for the campus, which Gatto envisions being akin to the private California Institute of Technology in Pasadena and specializing in science, technology, engineering, the arts and mathematics. Gatto has said it might be in an area near Silicon Valley, Hollywood or in a part of the state without a nearby UC campus.
American eighth-graders demonstrated virtually the same dismal grasp of U.S. history, civics and geography in test results released Wednesday than they did four years ago, when the National Report Card assessments were last administered.
About four out of five students who entered high school in fall 2010 graduated last June — 80.8 percent, up from 80.4 percent for the previous class. But 11.6 percent of those destined for the class of 2014 dropped out, up from 11.4 percent for the previous year’s class.
Instead of pushing in a reform direction, the CTA’s backers are trying to make it tougher to deal with inadequate teachers. SB 499 and AB 575, co-sponsored by Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins, D-San Diego, “would open teacher evaluations up to collective bargaining on not just the process, but the actual standards by which teachers are evaluated,” argued a coalition of education-reform groups opposing the bills. “Offering unions this power affords them the opportunity and incentive to water down teacher evaluations, including minimizing the percentage of their evaluations based on objective measures of student learning and academic growth.”
“School board members are counting on the state to pay for the plan, hoping California will send the district higher-than-expected revenues when calculations are revised next month. Alternatively, the district would look to cut programs and lay off educators to balance a budget deficit most recently projected at $140 million for the fiscal year that starts July 1.”