Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction, with approval of the State Board of Education, to develop an Academic Performance Index (API), as part of the Public School Performance Accountability Program, to measure the performance of schools and school districts, especially the academic performance of pupils. The API consists of a variety of indicators including specified achievement test scores, attendance rates, and graduation rates. Existing law requires the Superintendent, with approval of the state board, to develop an alternative accountability system for specified types of schools, including, among others, community day schools and continuation schools. Existing law allows these schools to receive an API score, but prohibits them from being included in the API rankings of schools.

Existing law, until January 1, 2017, requires the Superintendent and the state board, as part of the alternative accountability system for schools, or any successor system, to allow no more than 10 dropout recovery high schools, as defined, to report the results of an individual pupil growth model that is proposed by the school and certified by the Superintendent pursuant to specified criteria instead of reporting other indicators.

This bill would extend the repeal date of that provision to January 1, 2020, and would update cross-references.

Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction, with approval of the State Board of Education, to develop an Academic Performance Index (API), as part of the Public School Performance Accountability Program, to measure the performance of schools and school districts, especially the academic performance of pupils. The API consists of a variety of indicators including specified achievement test scores, attendance rates, and graduation rates. Existing law requires the Superintendent, with approval of the state board, to develop an alternative accountability system for specified types of schools, including, among others, community day schools and continuation schools. Existing law allows these schools to receive an API score, but prohibits them from being included in the API rankings of schools.

Existing law, until January 1, 2017, requires the Superintendent and the state board, as part of the alternative accountability system for schools, or any successor system, to allow no more than 10 dropout recovery high schools, as defined, to report the results of an individual pupil growth model that is proposed by the school and certified by the Superintendent pursuant to specified criteria instead of reporting other indicators.

This bill would extend the repeal date of that provision to January 1, 2020, and would update cross-references.

Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction, with approval of the State Board of Education, to develop an Academic Performance Index (API), as part of the Public School Performance Accountability Program, to measure the performance of schools and school districts, especially the academic performance of pupils. The API consists of a variety of indicators including specified achievement test scores, attendance rates, and graduation rates. Existing law requires the Superintendent, with approval of the state board, to develop an alternative accountability system for specified types of schools, including, among others, community day schools and continuation schools. Existing law allows these schools to receive an API score, but prohibits them from being included in the API rankings of schools.

Existing law, until January 1, 2017, requires the Superintendent and the state board, as part of the alternative accountability system for schools, or any successor system, to allow no more than 10 dropout recovery high schools, as defined, to report the results of an individual pupil growth model that is proposed by the school and certified by the Superintendent pursuant to specified criteria instead of reporting other indicators.

This bill would extend the repeal date of that provision to January 1, 2020, and would update cross-references.

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 2259

Author:

:

Vote:

SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 9-0, 6/8/16

AYES: Liu, Block, Hancock, Huff, Leyva, Mendoza, Monning, Pan, Vidak

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 8/11/16

AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, McGuire, Mendoza, Nielsen

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 79-0, 4/21/16 (Consent) - See last page for vote

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: School for Integrated Academics and Technologies

DIGEST: This bill extends the sunset by three years on the ability of dropout recovery high schools to use an individual student growth model for purposes of school accountability.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI), with the approval of the State Board of Education (SBE), to develop an Academic Performance Index (API) to measure the performance of schools and school districts, especially the academic performance of students. (Education Code § 52052(a))
   
2. Requires the SPI, with approval of the SBE, to develop an alternative accountability system for schools under the jurisdiction of a county board of education or a county superintendent of schools, community day schools non-public schools (special education), and alternative schools serving high-risk students. Existing law allows these schools to receive an API score, but prohibits them from being included in the API rankings of schools. (EC § 52052(g))
   
3. Requires that the SPI and the SBE, as part of the alternative accountability system or any successor system, to allow up to 10 dropout recovery high schools to report, in lieu of other indicators, the results of an individual student growth model that is proposed by the school and certified by the SPI.
   
4. Requires a dropout recovery high school to submit a proposed individual student growth model, and requires the SPI to review and certify that model if it meets all of the following criteria:
   
   1. The model measures learning based on valid and reliable nationally normed or criterion-referenced reading and mathematics tests.
      
   2. The model measures skills and knowledge aligned with state standards.
   3. The model measures the extent to which a student scored above an expected amount of growth based on the individual student’s initial achievement score.
   4. The model demonstrates the extent to which a school is able to accelerate learning on an annual basis.
      
5. Defines “dropout recovery high school” as a school offering instruction in any of grades 9-12, in which at least 50% of its students are either designated as dropouts, as defined, or left a school and were not otherwise enrolled in a school for a period of at least 180 days, and the school provides instruction in partnership with any of the following:
   
   1. The federal Workforce Investment Act of 1998.
      
   2. Federally-affiliated Youthbuild programs.
   3. Federal job corps training or instruction provided pursuant to a memorandum of understanding with the federal provider.
   4. The California Conservation Corps or local conservation corps. (EC § 52052.3)
      
6. Sunsets provisions related to an individual student growth model for dropout recovery high schools on January 1, 2017.

This bill extends the sunset by three years on the ability of dropout recovery high schools to use an individual student growth model for purposes of school accountability. Specifically, this bill:

1. Extends by three years, from January 1, 2017, to January 1, 2020, the sunset on the requirement that the SPI and the SBE allow up to 10 dropout recovery high schools to report the results of an individual student growth model that is proposed by the school and certified by the SPI.
   
2. Updates terminology, from the federal “Workforce Investment Act” to the federal “Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act.”

Comments

Individual pupil growth model. Dropout recovery high schools serve students whose skills are generally credit deficient, and enter and exit high school on an irregular schedule. For these reasons, using an annual “point in time” measure to gauge the performance of these schools does not yield useful data, particularly for evaluation of a school’s performance. To get a more accurate picture of student and school achievement, current law authorizes the state to instead use an individual pupil growth model, which measures student growth over time relative to grade level content standards, using nationally normed assessments. According to the author, California Department of Education (CDE) has not yet certified an individual pupil growth model authorized by current law. The authorizing legislation for this model was enacted after the alternative school accountability model was rendered inoperative.

Status of the K-12 school accountability system. The existing school accountability metric, the API, has been suspended due to the shift to new assessments that are aligned to the common core academic standards. The SBE is in the process of designing a new accountability system for the state’s schools, built on the foundation of the local control funding formula, local control and accountability plans, evaluation rubrics, and the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence. The API was developed prior to the creation of the alternative school accountability model. There is a desire to allow the new accountability system to be fully developed prior to the recreation of an accountability system for alternative schools. This bill helps keep the focus on the use of an individual student growth model for accountability for alternative schools.

Recent report on alternative school accountability. A May 2016 report by the Legislative Analyst’s Office found that the state does not have sufficient information to determine how well alternative schools are educating students, and recommended that the alternative accountability system should use indicators that parallel the state’s regular school accountability program whenever possible, better short-term alternative performance indicators should be developed, and longer-term student success should be measured. The Analyst notes that annual standardized test scores are not a good measure of student achievement in alternative schools because those students are enrolled in school for less than a full school year. The Analyst also notes that current dropout and graduation rate data are also not useful because they do not reflect transfers back to traditional schools, and that a four–year cohort graduation rate does not work for alternative schools because students seldom enroll for four years. [http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/ report/R_516PWR.pdf]

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, extending the program’s sunset would continue to allow up to 10 dropout recovery high schools to propose an individual student growth model to the SPI. This bill could result in potentially significant one-time General Fund costs to the CDE to review and certify that any proposed growth models submitted meet certain criteria. The CDE would also incur lesser ongoing costs to develop and maintain a Web site displaying the growth model data. To date, no models have been submitted to the CDE. However, if in a given year 10 schools submit a model, the CDE cites General Fund costs of up to $100,000 over two positions.

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/12/16)

School for Integrated Academics and Technologies (source)

Association of California School Administrators

California School Boards Association

Riverside County Superintendent of Schools

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/12/16)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 79-0, 4/21/16

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Arambula, Atkins, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Quirk, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon

NO VOTE RECORDED: Ridley-Thomas

Prepared by:

8/15/16 20:22:18

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular Session

AB 2259 (Medina) - School accountability: dropout recovery high schools

This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.

Bill Summary:

This bill extends the sunset by three years on the ability of dropout recovery high schools to use an individual student growth model for purposes of school accountability.

Fiscal Impact:

Extending the program’s sunset would continue to allow up to 10 dropout recovery high schools to propose an individual student growth model to the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI). This bill could result in potentially significant one-time General Fund costs to the California Department of Education (CDE) to review and certify that any proposed growth models submitted meet certain criteria. The CDE would also incur lesser ongoing costs to develop and maintain a website displaying the growth model data. To date, no models have been submitted to the CDE. However, if in a given year 10 schools submit a model, the CDE cites General Fund costs of up to $100,000 over two positions.

Background:

Certain schools serve as alternatives to traditional schools for students who could benefit from a different environment or experience behavioral issues that prevent them from remaining in their traditional school. A dropout recovery high school is defined as a school offering instruction in any of grades nine through 12 in which 50 percent or more of its students are either designated as dropouts, as specified, or left a school and were not otherwise enrolled in a school for a period of at least 180 days. The school must also provide instruction in partnership with any of the federal and state programs specified in current law aimed at preparing youth for entry into the workforce.

Since the enactment of the Local Control Funding Formula and the new statewide student assessment system, the state has been shifting to a new school accountability system. Under this system, the State Board of Education (Board) was charged with, among other things, developing and adopting a local control and accountability template which local educational agencies must complete describing their annual goals and progress towards achieving goals in eight state priority areas.

A key component of the prior accountability system, that has since been suspended, is the Academic Performance Index (API). The API is an annual measure of test score performance of schools and school districts. Additionally, the Alternative Schools Accountability Model (ASAM) was established to provide accountability for alternative schools serving highly mobile and at-risk students. These schools could apply to be held accountable using the ASAM and would receive an API score, but were prohibited from being included in the API rankings of schools. The ASAM was defunded in 2009 due to budget constraints.

Proposed Law:

This bill extends the sunset, from January 1, 2017 to January 1, 2020, of the requirement that the SPI and the Board allow up to 10 dropout recovery high schools to report the results of an individual student growth model that is proposed by the school and certified by the SPI, in lieu of other indicators. Staff notes if a school were to submit a proposed individual student growth model, it is unclear which indicators the model would replace as the law does not specify.

Staff Comments:

In its review of a proposed individual student growth model, the SPI must certify that it:

• Measures learning based on valid and reliable nationally normed or criterion-referenced reading and mathematics tests.
• Measures skills and knowledge aligned with state standards.
• Measures the extent to which a student scored above an expected amount of growth based on the individual student’s initial achievement score.
• Demonstrates the extent to which a school is able to accelerate learning on an annual basis.

Traditional accountability measures focus on schoolwide, and point-in-time performance such as statewide student assessments and four year cohort graduation rates. However, students attending dropout recovery high schools are typically credit deficient, and enter and exit high school on an irregular schedule. For these reasons, using an annual point-in-time measure to gauge the performance of these schools does not yield useful data, particularly for evaluation of a school’s performance. An individual student growth model measures student growth over time allowing the school’s performance to be assessed more meaningfully.

The Board recognized the unique characteristics of alternative schools in their February 2016 information memorandum that provided an analysis of a proposed methodology for using graduation rates as an accountability indicator. Schools that were formerly part of the ASAM were excluded from the methodology citing the need for further analysis.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Senator Carol Liu, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Bill No: AB 2259

Subject: School accountability: dropout recovery high schools

SUMMARY

This bill extends the sunset by three years on the ability of dropout recovery high schools to use an individual student growth model for purposes of school accountability.

BACKGROUND

Existing law:

1. Requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI), with the approval of the State Board of Education (SBE), to develop an Academic Performance Index (API) to measure the performance of schools and school districts, especially the academic performance of students. (Education Code § 52052(a))
   
2. Requires the SPI, with approval of the SBE, to develop an alternative accountability system for schools under the jurisdiction of a county board of education or a county superintendent of schools, community day schools non-public schools (special education), and alternative schools serving high-risk students. Existing law allows these schools to receive an API score, but prohibits them from being included in the API rankings of schools. (EC § 52052(g))
   
3. Requires that the SPI and the SBE, as part of the alternative accountability system or any successor system, to allow up to 10 dropout recovery high schools to report, in lieu of other indicators, the results of an individual student growth model that is proposed by the school and certified by the SPI.
   
4. Requires a dropout recovery high school to submit a proposed individual student growth model, and requires the SPI to review and certify that model if it meets all of the following criteria:
   
   1. The model measures learning based on valid and reliable nationally normed or criterion-referenced reading and mathematics tests.
      
   2. The model measures skills and knowledge aligned with state standards.
   3. the model measures the extent to which a student scored above an expected amount of growth based on the individual student’s initial achievement score.
   4. The model demonstrates the extent to which a school is able to accelerate learning on an annual basis.
      
5. Defines “dropout recovery high school” as a school offering instruction in any of grades 9-12, in which at least 50% of its students are either designated as dropouts, as defined, or left a school and were not otherwise enrolled in a school for a period of at least 180 days, and the school provides instruction in partnership with any of the following:
   
   1. The federal Workforce Investment Act of 1998.
      
   2. Federally-affiliated Youthbuild programs.
      
   3. Federal job corps training or instruction provided pursuant to a memorandum of understanding with the federal provider.
      
   4. The California Conservation Corps or local conservation corps.

(EC § 52052.3)

1. Sunsets provisions related to an individual student growth model for dropout recovery high schools on January 1, 2017.

ANALYSIS

This bill extends the sunset by three years on the ability of dropout recovery high schools to use an individual student growth model for purposes of school accountability. Specifically, this bill:

1. Extends by three years, from January 1, 2017, to January 1, 2020, the sunset on the requirement that the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) and the State Board of Education allow up to 10 dropout recovery high schools to report the results of an individual student growth model that is proposed by the school and certified by the SPI.
   
2. Updates terminology, from the federal “Workforce Investment Act” to the federal “Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act.”

STAFF COMMENTS

1. Need for the bill. Existing law authorizes dropout recovery high schools to submit a proposed individual pupil growth model to the California Department of Education, and requires certification of the model if it meets certain criteria. California has adopted new standards (the common core academic content standards), defunded the Alternative Schools Accountability Model thereby rendering it inoperative, and is now undertaking the development of a new accountability system for K-12 schools. According to the author, “AB 2259 will allow schools to apply for certification and ensure that an individual growth model strategy remains available. This bill helps to maintain an important component of the accountability system for dropout recovery high schools. Also, it allows the State Board of Education and the Legislature to complete deliberations on appropriate accountability.”
   
2. Individual pupil growth model. Dropout recovery high schools serve students whose skills are generally credit deficient, and enter and exit high school on an irregular schedule. For these reasons, using an annual “point in time” measure to gauge the performance of these schools does not yield useful data, particularly for evaluation of a school’s performance. To get a more accurate picture of student and school achievement, current law authorizes the state to instead use an individual pupil growth model, which measures student growth over time relative to grade level content standards, using nationally normed assessments. According to the author, California Department of Education has not yet certified an individual pupil growth model authorized by current law. The authorizing legislation for this model was enacted after the alternative school accountability model was rendered inoperative.
   
3. Status of the K-12 school accountability system. The existing school accountability metric, the Academic Performance Index (API), has been suspended due to the shift to new assessments that are aligned to the common core academic standards. The State Board of Education is in the process of designing a new accountability system for the state’s schools, built on the foundation of the local control funding formula, local control and accountability plans, evaluation rubrics, and the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence. The API was developed prior to the creation of the alternative school accountability model. There is a desire to allow the new accountability system to be fully developed prior to the recreation of an accountability system for alternative schools. This bill helps keep the focus on the use of an individual student growth model for accountability for alternative schools.
   
4. Recent report on alternative school accountability. A May 2016 report by the Legislative Analyst’s Office found that the state does not have sufficient information to determine how well alternative schools are educating students, and recommended that the alternative accountability system should use indicators that parallel the state’s regular school accountability program whenever possible, better short-term alternative performance indicators should be developed, and longer-term student success should be measured. The Analyst notes that annual standardized test scores are not a good measure of student achievement in alternative schools because those students are enrolled in school for less than a full school year. The Analyst also notes that current dropout and graduation rate data are also not useful because they do not reflect transfers back to traditional schools, and that a four–year cohort graduation rate does not work for alternative schools because students seldom enroll for four years. [http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/report/R_516PWR.pdf]

SUPPORT

Association of California School Administrators

California School Boards Association

Riverside County Superintendent of Schools

School for Integrated Academics and Technologies (SIATech)

OPPOSITION

None received.

-- END --

Date of Hearing: April 13, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Lorena Gonzalez, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2259

Author:(Medina) – As Introduced Ver:February 18, 2016

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill extends, from January 1, 2017 to January 1, 2020, a requirement that the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) and the State Board of Education (SBE) allow no more than 10 dropout recovery high schools to report the results of an individual pupil growth model as part of the alternative accountability system for schools or any successor system.

FISCAL EFFECT:

Ongoing administrative costs of approximately $104,000 GF if 10 schools submit a growth model for approval. To date, no models have been submitted. If CDE were to approve a growth model, the department would need to review performance indicators, compile data, and display results on the CDE website.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. Dropout recovery high schools serve students whose skills are generally far below grade-level, and enter and exit high school on an irregular schedule. Traditional accountability systems use annual “point in time” measures to gauge the performance of schools. This does not provide useful data for dropout recovery schools. To get a more accurate picture of student and school achievement, current law authorizes the state to instead use an individual pupil growth model, which measures student growth over time relative to grade level content standards, using nationally normed assessments.

The CDE has not yet certified an individual pupil growth model authorized by current law. The School for Integrated Academics and Technologies (SIATech) is sponsoring this bill to extend the sunset on these provisions of law to ensure that an individual growth model strategy remains an available option while the SBE and the Legislature complete deliberations on appropriate accountability measures.

1. New state accountability system. The SBE is in the process of designing a new accountability system for traditional schools, built on the foundation of the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). The SBE also intends to align this new system with the requirements of the new federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). Under current law, the SBE must adopt evaluation rubrics by October 1, 2016. It is likely the SBE will complete their work on this new accountability system for traditional schools before designing an alternative accountability system for dropout recovery schools.

Analysis Prepared by: Misty Feusahrens / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: April 6, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Patrick O'Donnell, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2259 (

Author:Medina) – As Introduced Ver:February 18, 2016

SUBJECT: School accountability: dropout recovery high schools

SUMMARY: Extends the sunset date for the requirement that the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) and the State Board of Education (SBE), as part of the alternative accountability system for schools, allow no more than 10 dropout recovery high schools to report the results of an individual pupil growth model instead of reporting other indicators. Specifically, this bill:

1. Extends, from January 1, 2017 to January 1, 2020, a requirement that the SPI and the SBE, as part of the alternative accountability system for schools or any successor system, allow no more than 10 dropout recovery high schools to report the results of an individual pupil growth model that is proposed by the school and certified by the SPI pursuant to specified criteria, instead of reporting other indicators.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires the SPI, with approval of the SBE, to develop an Academic Performance Index (API), as part of the Public School Performance Accountability Act (PSAA), to measure the performance of schools and school districts, especially the academic performance of pupils.
2. Requires the SPI, with approval of the SBE, to develop an alternative accountability system for specified types of schools, including community day schools and continuation schools. Existing law allows these schools to receive an API score, but prohibits them from being included in the API rankings of schools.
3. Requires that the SPI and the SBE, as part of the alternative accountability system for schools or any successor system, to allow no more than 10 dropout recovery high schools, to report the results of an individual pupil growth model that is proposed by the school and certified by the SPI pursuant to specified criteria, instead of reporting other indicators. Sunsets this requirement on January 1, 2017. Specifies the following criteria:
   1. the model measures learning based on valid and reliable nationally normed or criterion-referenced reading and mathematics test
   2. the model measures skills and knowledge aligned with state standards
   3. the model measures the extent to which a pupil scored above an expected amount of growth based on the individual pupil’s initial achievement score
   4. the model demonstrates the extent to which a school is able to accelerate learning on an annual basis
4. Defines a dropout recovery high school as one offering instruction in any of grades 9 to 12, in which 50 percent or more of its students are either designated as dropouts pursuant to the exit and withdrawal codes developed by the CDE, or left a school and were not otherwise enrolled in a school for a period of at least 180 days, and the school provides instruction in partnership with any of the following: the federal Workforce Investment Act of 1998, federally-affiliated Youthbuild programs, federal job corps training, or the California Conservation Corps or local conservation corps.

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown

COMMENTS:

Need for the bill. The author states, “AB 2259 will allow schools to apply for certification and ensure that an individual growth model strategy remains available. This will help to maintain an important component of the accountability system for dropout recovery schools. Also, it allows the State Board of Education and the Legislature to complete deliberations on appropriate accountability.”

Alternative School Accountability Model. This bill proposes that to extend the sunset date for an authorization to allow dropout recovery high schools to report the results of an individual pupil growth model as part of the Alternative Schools Accountability Model (ASAM).

The ASAM was established by the Public Schools Accountability Act of 1999. From 2003 to 2009, the state used the ASAM in lieu of the API for alternative schools. Alternative schools could choose any 3 of 14 performance indicators, including reading, writing and mathematics achievement, credit and course completion, suspension/expulsion, and student behavior.

Concerns regarding the inability to compare schools because of the indicators chosen, and about the exclusion of students who were enrolled for less than 90 days, led to an effort to reform the system, but funding for the ASAM was eliminated in 2009, making the system inoperative.

Why an individual pupil growth model? Dropout recovery high schools serve students whose skills are generally far below grade-level, and enter and exit high school on an irregular schedule. For these reasons, using an annual “point in time” measure to gauge the performance of these schools does not yield useful data, particularly for evaluation of a school’s performance.

To get a more accurate picture of student and school achievement, current law authorizes the state to instead use an individual pupil growth model, which measures student growth over time relative to grade level content standards, using nationally normed assessments.

According to the author, CDE has not yet certified an individual pupil growth model authorized by current law. The authorizing legislation for this model was enacted after the ASAM was made inoperative. This why current law speaks to the use of the individual pupil growth model in the ASAM or “any successor system.”

State and federal accountability system under construction. The SBE is in the process of designing a new accountability system for the state’s schools, built on the foundation of the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), Local Control and Accountability Plans (LCAPs), evaluation rubrics, and the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence (CCEE). Under current law, the SBE must adopt evaluation rubrics by October 1, 2016. The SBE also intends to align this new system with the requirements of the new federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). The new system will be designed using multiple measures and will represent a continuous improvement framework.

When the state developed the prior accountability system, and built the Academic Performance Index (API), it created the ASAM after designing the accountability system for traditional schools. This sequence will likely again be the case for the new accountability system now under construction.

LAO report on alternative school accountability. A 2015 report by the Legislative Analyst’s Office found that the state does not have sufficient information to determine how well alternative schools are educating students, and recommended that the state 1) collect better performance data for alternative schools and then use this information to set performance expectations, 2) monitor their progress toward meeting those expectations, and 3) support underperforming schools.

The Analyst notes that annual standardized test scores are not a good measure student achievement in alternative schools because they enroll for less than a year. The Analyst also notes that current dropout and graduation rate data are also not useful because they do not reflect transfers back to traditional schools, and that a four–year cohort graduation rate does not work for alternative schools because students seldom enroll for four years.

Amend a section which is inoperative? The SBE suspended the API starting in the 2014-15 academic year, essentially making the PSAA statutes inoperative. The authorization for the use of the individual pupil growth model is located in those inoperative sections. The Committee may wish to consider whether these sections should be established as part of a separate section, outside of the PSAA, as these sections may at some point be repealed.

Prior legislation. AB 1668 (Carter, Chapter 424, Statutes of 2012) revised the definition of a dropout recovery high school.

AB 180 (Carter, Chapter 669, Statutes of 2011) authorized a dropout recovery high school growth measure as part of the PSAA or any successor alternate accountability system.

AB 2307 (Carter) of the 2009-10 Session, was similar to AB 180 (Carter) of the 2011-2012 Session, and was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

School for Integrated Academics and Technologies (SIATech) (Sponsor)

Association of California School Administrators

Opposition

None received

Analysis Prepared by: Tanya Lieberman / ED. / (916) 319-2087