CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 2350

Author:(O'Donnell)

As Amended Ver:August 19, 2016

Majority vote

Original Committee Reference: ED.

SUMMARY: Prohibits middle and high school English learner students from being denied enrollment in core curriculum courses, courses required for graduation, and courses required for middle school grade promotion, consistent with federal law.

The Senate amendments:

1. Delete the section of the bill which required that the California Department of Education (CDE) contract for the development of a series of videos demonstrating best practices for implementing designated and integrated English language development (ELD). This project was funded in the Budget Act of 2016.
2. Delete the section of the bill which required that if a local educational agency (LEA) offered a course designed for long term English learners the course confer credits in English language arts necessary to meet graduation or grade promotion requirements.
3. Delete the section defining "integrated and designated" ELD as used in the state's ELD framework.
4. Delete the section updating the term "specially designed content instruction in English," as defined for the purpose of teacher credentialing, to conform with existing practice in teacher credentialing.
5. Align with federal law the section prohibiting middle and high school English learners from being denied enrollment in specified courses, by:
6. Defining the "standard instructional program" of a school (as used in case law related to federal law) to include, at a minimum, core curriculum courses in English language arts, mathematics and science; courses required for graduation; and courses required for grade promotion.
7. Stating that English learners cannot be denied enrollment in "a-g" courses or advanced courses which are not part of the standard instructional program on the sole basis of their classification as English learners.
8. Clarifying that the exemption from the above prohibition applies to programs designed to meet the academic and transitional needs of newly arrived immigrants by focusing on English proficiency as a primary objective, provided that they are designed to remedy any academic deficits incurred during participation and are reasonably calculated to enable parity of participation in the standard instructional program.

EXISTING LAW:

1. The federal Equal Educational Opportunity Act of 1974 (EEOA, 20 United States Code (U.S.C.) Section 1701 et seq.) prohibits the denial of equal educational opportunity by the failure of an educational agency to take appropriate action to overcome language barriers that impede equal participation by its students in its instructional programs.
2. Existing case law, Castaneda v. Pickard (1981, 648 F.2d 989), interprets the EEOA to require schools to ensure English learners' participation in the "standard instructional program" of a school either by providing access to the standard instructional program along with English language support, or instead by providing a program for English learners, "during the early part of their school career, which has, as its primary objective the development of literacy in English," provided that the program is designed to help the student "overcome the academic deficits" incurred during participation in that program, and that it is "reasonably calculated to enable students to attain parity of participation in the standard instructional program within a reasonable length of time after they enter the school system."

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee (based on August 1, 2016 version), this bill is not anticipated to result in significant costs to the state as the prohibition of preventing English learners (ELs) from enrolling in courses required for graduation, grade promotion, or minimum course requirements for University of California (UC) and California State University (CSU) admission, is predicated on federal law which prohibits a state from denying equal educational opportunity, as specified. This bill provides greater specificity on this federal requirement that appears to align with federal guidance.

COMMENTS:

Access to the core curriculum for English learners. This bill addresses English learners' access to core curriculum courses in middle and high school by prohibiting ELs from being prevented from taking core curriculum courses and courses necessary for graduation.

Policy Analysis for California Education's (PACE) 2015 report, "Improving the Opportunities and Outcomes of California's Students Learning English," reported that ELs are less likely than non-ELs to be enrolled in core academic subject courses such as English language arts, mathematics, and science, and as a result earn fewer credits toward graduation than non-EL students. The research further found that limited access to English Language Arts (ELA) is largely due to 1) ELD courses being used as a substitute, rather than a complement, for ELA courses, and 2) the enrollment of elementary and secondary ELs in intervention classes for language arts and math which were not designed for ELs' language and academic needs.

Specifically, this research found that in one large California district:

1. 42% of ELs were not enrolled in ELA courses (compared to 1-2% of non-ELs)
2. 4% were not enrolled in math courses (compared to 1% of non-ELs)
3. 10% of ELs were not enrolled in science courses (compared to 1% of non-ELs)
4. Overall, 47% of ELs were not enrolled in at least one core curriculum area, compared to 5% of non ELs
5. In math and science, ELs with higher levels of English proficiency are just as likely as those with lower levels of English proficiency to not be enrolled.
6. Controlling for prior achievement, ELs are still 40% less likely to be enrolled in a full academic course load compared to similarly achieving non-ELs.
7. Some students were prohibited from taking ELA courses because they were enrolled in ELD courses, the content area preventing ELs from being reclassified was generally ELA itself. This finding suggests that some English learners are stuck in a kind of trap - unable to access ELA courses until they are proficient in ELA.

Other recent research on English learners' course enrollment in other California districts has found similar patterns of restricted access to the core curriculum. These findings are consistent with recent national research, which concluded, that even with demographic and academic controls, English learners have markedly different course taking patterns, and that overall they experience significantly less academic exposure.

PACE reported that this research "suggests that English learners often suffer from restricted educational opportunity compared to that of non-English learners, particularly with regard to their academic learning needs."

Clarification of federal law. Current federal law and related case law prohibit the denial of English learner's participation in the "standard instructional program" of a school, and authorize schools to either provide access to the standard instructional program along with English language support, or instead provide a program for English learners, "during the early part of their school career, which has, as its primary objective the development of literacy in English," provided that the program is designed to help the student "overcome the academic deficits" incurred during participation in that program, and that it is "reasonably calculated to enable students to attain parity of participation in the standard instructional program within a reasonable length of time after they enter the school system."

This bill is intended to clarify the requirements of federal law for California schools. It clarifies the meaning of "standard instructional program of a school" in this state (to mean core curriculum courses in English language arts, mathematics, and science, and courses needed for graduation and for middle school grade promotion). It clarifies that English learners cannot be denied the ability to enroll in a full course load of these courses. And the bill clarifies that the option to provide a program for middle and high school students (who are in the early part of their school career in U.S. schools), which emphasizes English over the standard instructional program, must be designed to "remedy academic deficits" incurred during the program, as required by federal law.

Analysis Prepared by: Tanya Lieberman / ED. / (916) 319-2087 FN: 0004813

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 2350

Author: O'Donnell (D)

Amended: 8/19/16 in Senate

Vote: 21

SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 9-0, 6/22/16

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

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 8/1/16

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

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 6/1/16 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: English learners

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill prohibits a middle or high school English learner (EL) student, who scores at any proficiency level on the assessment of English language development, from being denied from enrolling in courses required for graduation, or meeting the minimum course requirements for admission to the University of California (UC) or California State University (CSU).

Senate Floor Amendments of 8/19/16 narrow the scope of the bill by deleting sections related to integrated and designated English language development and specially designed content instruction in English, and align the bill with federal law by prohibiting middle and high school English learners from being denied enrollment in specified courses.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Requires the State Board of Education to approve standards for English language development for students whose primary language is other than English. These standards are required to be comparable in rigor and specificity to the adopted standards for English language arts, mathematics, and science. (EC § 60811)
2. Requires the State Board of Education to adopt revised curriculum frameworks that are aligned to the common core standards in English language arts by July 30, 2014. Existing law also requires State Board policies to ensure that the English Language Arts (ELA) curriculum frameworks include the English Language Development (ELD) standards and related strategies in the core subjects of mathematics, science, and history-social science. (EC § 60207)
3. Prohibits, under the federal Equal Educational Opportunity Act of 1974, the denial of equal educational opportunity by the failure of an educational agency to take appropriate action to overcome language barriers that impede equal participation by its students in its instructional programs. (20 U.S.C. Sec. 1701 et seq.)
4. Requires the CSU and requests the UC to establish a model uniform set of academic standards for high school courses that satisfy university admission requirements. In addition, both the CSU and the UC were directed to implement a speedy process whereby schools could obtain approval of their courses for admission purposes, and require that this process notify applicant schools whether a submitted course has been approved or denied by August 1 each school year. (EC § 66205.5)

This bill:

1. Defines “standard instructional program” as, at a minimum, core curriculum courses, as defined by current law, courses required to meet state and local graduation requirements, and courses required for middle school grade promotion.
2. Provides that, consistent with federal law, a middle or high school student classified as an EL and scores at any proficiency level on the assessment of English language development be granted access to core curriculum courses. Specifically, it:
   1. Prohibits denying such a student from:
      1. Enrolling in courses that are part of the standard instructional program of the school that the student attends.
      2. Enrolling in a full course load of courses that are part of the standard instructional program.
      3. Enrolling in courses that are not part of a school’s standard instructional program that either meet the subject matter requirements for college admissions or are advanced courses, such as advanced placement courses, on the sole basis of a student’s classification as an English learner.
   2. Makes these requirements inapplicable to a student participating in a program designed to meet the academic and transitional needs of newly arrived immigrants, provided that the program is designed to remedy any academic deficits incurred during participation and that the program’s design is reasonably calculated to enable these students to attain parity of participation in the standard instructional program within a reasonable length of time, as specified.
3. Makes a number of technical changes.
4. Makes a number of related declarations and findings.

Comments

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, recent evidence has pointed to a number of institutional barriers to ELs’ success. These include poor access to the core curriculum and insufficient teacher preparation and professional development to address the instructional needs of ELs, particularly in light of the state’s new ELD standards. This bill will ensure that ELs are not kept from enrolling in core curriculum courses necessary for graduation.

According to the author, ensuring access to core academic subjects and prohibiting the substitution of English language development classes for English language arts courses will begin to address the sizable gap in academic achievement that persists for ELs relative to their peers.

1. English learner achievement gap. There are approximately 1.4 million ELs in California public schools, representing 22 percent of the state’s enrollment. California’s EL students score substantially lower on state assessments than non-EL students. While there has been incremental growth in achievement among students in both the general population and ELs, the rate of growth in the general population has significantly outpaced that of English learners and the achievement gap has widened over time.
   1. On the 2013 California Standards Tests of English language arts, 23 percent of ELs scored at the proficient or advanced levels, compared with 63 percent of English-only peers, and on the tests of mathematics 37 percent scored at those levels compared with 55 percent of their peers.
   2. On the 2015 administration of the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress, 11 percent of ELs in all grades met or exceeded standard in English language arts/literacy and 11 percent in math, compared with 69 percent and 55 percent for those subjects, respectively, for students proficient in English.
   3. According to the California Department of Education (CDE), the overall 2013-14 four-year cohort graduation was 81 percent, while the rate for ELs was 65 percent, the lowest of any subgroup besides students in special education. The dropout rate for ELs, at 21 percent, was the highest of any subgroup.
   4. In 2014, the pass rate of ELs on the California High School Exit Examination language arts test was half the rate of English only peers (17 percent vs. 34 percent), and was also lower on the mathematics portion (13 percent vs. 20 percent).
2. Recent related report. In October 2015, the Policy Analysis for California Education's (PACE) issued, "Improving the Opportunities and Outcomes of California's Students Learning English," a report on research examining EL needs, policies, practices, and outcomes. Among other things, researchers found that ELs are less likely than non-ELs to be enrolled in core academic subject courses and, as a result, earn fewer credits toward graduation than non-EL students. The research further found that limited access to English language arts (ELA) is largely due to 1) ELD courses being used as a substitute, rather than a complement, for ELA courses, and 2) the enrollment of elementary and secondary ELs in intervention classes for language arts and math which were not designed for ELs' language and academic needs.

This research found that in one large urban school district, 30 percent of ELs were not enrolled in ELA courses, and 35 percent were not enrolled in a full course load. PACE concluded, "Research from the three partnerships suggests that English learners often suffer from restricted educational opportunity compared to that of non-English learners, particularly with regard to their academic learning needs."

The report also noted that the most common barrier to reclassification for middle and high school ELs was passage of the ELA content standards criterion. Given the findings that enrollment in ELD prohibits some students from taking ELA courses; it is unclear how students are expected to obtain the course content necessary to successfully meet criteria for reclassification.

This bill, in an effort to respond to these concerns, prohibits ELs who score at any proficiency level on the assessment of English language development from being denied from taking core curriculum courses necessary for graduation, grade promotion, or meeting a-g requirements for college admission.

1. Related court case. Existing case law, Castaneda v. Pickard (1981, 648 F.2d 989), interprets the federal Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974 to require schools to ensure English learners’ participation in the “standard instructional program” of a school either by providing access to the standard instructional program along with English language support, or instead by providing a program for English learners, “during the early part of their school career, which has, as its primary objective the development of literacy in English,” provided that the program is designed to help the student “overcome the academic deficits” incurred during participation in that program, and that it is “reasonably calculated to enable students to attain parity of participation in the standard instructional program within a reasonable length of time after they enter the school system.”

This bill declares that it is the intent of the Legislature to clarify these requirements for California public schools. In addition, this bill seeks to align its provisions with the specified sections in federal law (20 U.S.C. Sec. 1701 et seq.) that prohibit middle and high school ELs from being denied enrollment in specified courses.

1. Evolution of ELD instruction. Instruction for ELs evolved significantly in the last 40 years. Initial “English as a Second Language” (ESL) approaches used from 1900 to the 1970s focused solely on English acquisition. Content-based ESL emerged in the 1980s, providing support for English acquisition through academic content. Models known as Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English and Sheltered English, in use from the 1980s to the present day, have focused on providing ELs access to content through modified (sometimes referred to as “scaffolded”) instruction.

The English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework adopted by the State Board of Education in 2014 provides a comprehensive strategy for meeting both the content and language learning needs of ELs. This model is known as the “integrated and designated” model of ELD. Under this model, “integrated ELD instruction” occurs throughout the school day in every subject area by every teacher who has an EL student in the classroom. The California ELD Standards are used in tandem with the California Common Core State Standards for ELA/Literacy and other content standards to ensure students strengthen their abilities to use academic English as they learn content through English. “Designated ELD” is provided to ELs during a protected time in the regular school day, during which teachers use the ELD Standards as the focal standards in ways that build into and from content instruction to develop critical language ELs need for content learning in English.

According to the CDE, curriculum frameworks offer guidance for implementing content standards and describe the curriculum and instruction necessary to help students achieve proficiency. They specify the design of instructional materials and professional development. In 2015, the State Board of Education approved a list of adopted instructional materials aligned to the newly adopted English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework. Local educational agencies (LEAs) are expected to select from the adopted instructional materials within the next few years.

Related/Prior Legislation

AB 2785 (O’Donnell) requires the CDE to develop a manual for the purpose of providing guidance to LEAs on identifying, assessing, and supporting, ELs who may qualify for special education services by July 1, 2018.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: Yes

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, this bill is not anticipated to result in significant costs to the state as the prohibition of preventing ELs from enrolling in courses required for graduation, grade promotion, or minimum course requirements for UC and CSU admission, is predicated on federal law which prohibits a state from denying equal educational opportunity, as specified. This bill provides greater specificity on this federal requirement that appears to align with federal guidance.

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/22/16)

Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/22/16)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 6/1/16

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, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon

NO VOTE RECORDED: Harper, Obernolte

Prepared by: Olgalilia Ramirez / ED. / (916) 651-4105

8/22/16 22:44:21

**** END ****

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 2350

Author:

:

Vote:

SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 9-0, 6/22/16

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

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 8/1/16

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

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 6/1/16 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill prohibits a middle or high school English learner (EL) student from being prevented from enrolling in courses required for graduation, grade promotion, or meeting the minimum course requirements for admission to the University of California (UC) or California State University (CSU).

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Requires the State Board of Education to approve standards for English language development for students whose primary language is other than English. These standards are required to be comparable in rigor and specificity to the adopted standards for English language arts, mathematics, and science. (EC § 60811)
2. Requires the State Board of Education to adopt revised curriculum frameworks that are aligned to the common core standards in English language arts by July 30, 2014. Existing law also requires State Board policies to ensure that the English Language Arts (ELA) curriculum frameworks include the English Language Development (ELD) standards and related strategies in the core subjects of mathematics, science, and history-social science. (EC § 60207)
3. Requires that the Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CTC) issue an authorization for a teacher to provide specified services to limited-English proficient pupils and defines various terms for this purpose. (EC § 44253.2 and § 44253.3)
4. Requires the CSU and requests the UC to establish a model uniform set of academic standards for high school courses that satisfy university admission requirements. In addition, both the CSU and the UC were directed to implement a speedy process whereby schools could obtain approval of their courses for admission purposes, and require that this process notify applicant schools whether a submitted course has been approved or denied by August 1 each school year. (EC § 66205.5)

This bill:

1. Defines “designated English language development” and “integrated English language development” instruction to align statute with the newly adopted content standards and English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework. Specifically, it:
   1. Defines “designated English language development” as instruction during a protected time in the school day in which ELD standards are used as focal standards in order to develop language needed for ELs to access content learning in English.
   2. Defines “integrated English language development” as instruction in which all teachers with ELs in their classroom use ELD standards in tandem with content standards regardless of course content.
2. Conforms the definition of “specially designed content instruction delivered in English” within existing law relative to CTC authorization to teach ELs with the newly adopted content standards and English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework.
3. Provides that a middle or high school student classified as an EL or enrolled in ELD courses be granted access to core curriculum courses. Specifically, it:
   1. Prohibits preventing such a student from:
      1. Enrolling in core curriculum courses required for graduation, grade promotion or to meet subject matter requirements for college admission.
      2. Taking a full course load in subjects required for graduation, grade promotion or to meet subject matter requirements for college admission.
   2. Makes these requirements inapplicable to a student participating in a program designed to meet the academic and transitional needs of newly arrived immigrants, as specified.
4. Makes a number of technical changes.
5. Makes a number of related declarations and findings.

Comments

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, recent evidence has pointed to a number of institutional barriers to ELs’ success. These include poor access to the core curriculum and insufficient teacher preparation and professional development to address the instructional needs of ELs, particularly in light of the state’s new ELD standards. This bill will ensure that ELs are not kept from enrolling in core curriculum courses necessary for graduation.

According to the author, ensuring access to core academic subjects and prohibiting the substitution of English language development classes for English language arts courses will begin to address the sizable gap in academic achievement that persists for ELs relative to their peers. In addition, the opportunity to address ELD needs under new standards that call for “integrated and designated” instruction will require support and professional development to realize this major shift in pedagogy.

1. English learner achievement gap. There are approximately 1.4 million ELs in California public schools, representing 22 percent of the state’s enrollment. California’s EL students score substantially lower on state assessments than non-EL students. While there has been incremental growth in achievement among students in both the general population and ELs, the rate of growth in the general population has significantly outpaced that of English learners and the achievement gap has widened over time.
   1. On the 2013 California Standards Tests of English language arts, 23 percent of ELs scored at the proficient or advanced levels, compared with 63 percent of English-only peers, and on the tests of mathematics 37 percent scored at those levels compared with 55 percent of their peers.
   2. On the 2015 administration of the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress, 11 percent of ELs in all grades met or exceeded standard in English language arts/literacy and 11 percent in math, compared with 69 percent and 55 percent for those subjects, respectively, for students proficient in English.
   3. According to the California Department of Education (CDE), the overall 2013-14 four-year cohort graduation was 81 percent, while the rate for ELs was 65 percent, the lowest of any subgroup besides students in special education. The dropout rate for ELs, at 21 percent, was the highest of any subgroup.
   4. In 2014, the pass rate of ELs on the California High School Exit Examination language arts test was half the rate of English only peers (17 percent vs. 34 percent), and was also lower on the mathematics portion (13 percent vs. 20 percent).
2. Recent related report. In October 2015, the Policy Analysis for California Education's (PACE) issued, "Improving the Opportunities and Outcomes of California's Students Learning English," a report on research examining EL needs, policies, practices, and outcomes. Among other things, researchers found that ELs are less likely than non-ELs to be enrolled in core academic subject courses and, as a result, earn fewer credits toward graduation than non-EL students. The research further found that limited access to English language arts (ELA) is largely due to 1) ELD courses being used as a substitute, rather than a complement, for ELA courses, and 2) the enrollment of elementary and secondary ELs in intervention classes for language arts and math which were not designed for ELs' language and academic needs.

This research found that in one large urban school district, 30 percent of ELs were not enrolled in ELA courses, and 35 percent were not enrolled in a full course load. PACE concluded, "Research from the three partnerships suggests that English learners often suffer from restricted educational opportunity compared to that of non-English learners, particularly with regard to their academic learning needs."

The report also noted that the most common barrier to reclassification for middle and high school ELs was passage of the ELA content standards criterion. Given the findings that enrollment in ELD prohibits some students from taking ELA courses; it is unclear how students are expected to obtain the course content necessary to successfully meet criteria for reclassification.

This bill, in an effort to respond to these concerns, prohibits ELs from being prevented from taking core curriculum courses necessary for graduation, grade promotion, or meeting a-g requirements for college admission.

1. Evolution of ELD instruction. This bill defines ELD instruction to align statute with the newly adopted English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework, which offers guidance for providing all California students with English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. In addition, it offers guidance for supporting ELs’ progress in English language development.

Instruction for ELs evolved significantly in the last 40 years. Initial “English as a Second Language” (ESL) approaches used from 1900 to the 1970s focused solely on English acquisition. Content-based ESL emerged in the 1980s, providing support for English acquisition through academic content. Models known as Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English and Sheltered English, in use from the 1980s to the present day, have focused on providing ELs access to content through modified (sometimes referred to as “scaffolded”) instruction.

The English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework adopted by the State Board of Education in 2014 provides a comprehensive strategy for meeting both the content and language learning needs of ELs. This model is known as the “integrated and designated” model of ELD. Under this model, “integrated ELD instruction” occurs throughout the school day in every subject area by every teacher who has an EL student in the classroom. The California ELD Standards are used in tandem with the California Common Core State Standards for ELA/Literacy and other content standards to ensure students strengthen their abilities to use academic English as they learn content through English. “Designated ELD” is provided to ELs during a protected time in the regular school day, during which teachers use the ELD Standards as the focal standards in ways that build into and from content instruction to develop critical language ELs need for content learning in English.

According to the CDE, curriculum frameworks offer guidance for implementing content standards and describe the curriculum and instruction necessary to help students achieve proficiency. They specify the design of instructional materials and professional development. In 2015, the State Board of Education approved a list of adopted instructional materials aligned to the newly adopted English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework. Local educational agencies (LEAs) are expected to select from the adopted instructional materials within the next few years.

Related/Prior Legislation

AB 2785 (O’Donnell) requires the CDE to develop a manual for the purpose of providing guidance to LEAs on identifying, assessing, and supporting, ELs who may qualify for special education services by July 1, 2018.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, this bill is not anticipated to result in significant costs to the state as the prohibition of preventing ELs from enrolling in courses required for graduation, grade promotion, or minimum course requirements for UC and CSU admission, is predicated on federal law which prohibits a state from denying equal educational opportunity, as specified. This bill provides greater specificity on this federal requirement that appears to align with federal guidance.

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/2/16)

Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson

California Association for Bilingual Education

Californians Together

Santa Clara County Office of Education

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/2/16)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 6/1/16

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, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon

NO VOTE RECORDED: Harper, Obernolte

Prepared by:

8/3/16 19:00:47

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular Session

AB 2350 (O'Donnell) - English learners

This bill does not meet the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.

Bill Summary:

This bill prohibits a middle or high school English learner (EL) student from being prevented from enrolling in courses required for graduation, grade promotion, or meeting the minimum course requirements for admission to the University of California (UC) or California State University (CSU).

Fiscal Impact:

• This bill is not anticipated to result in significant costs to the state as the prohibition of preventing ELs from enrolling in courses required for graduation, grade promotion, or minimum course requirements for UC and CSU admission, is predicated on federal law which prohibits a state from denying equal educational opportunity, as specified. This bill provides greater specificity on this federal requirement that appears to align with federal guidance. See staff comments.

Background:

Existing law requires the State Board of Education to approve standards for English language development (ELD) for students whose primary language is other than English. They describe the key knowledge, skills, and abilities that students who are learning English as a new language need in order to access, engage with, and achieve in grade‐level academic content. These standards are required to be comparable in rigor and specificity to the adopted standards for English language arts, mathematics, and science. (EC § 60811)

According to the California Department of Education (CDE), the ELD Standards correspond with the California Common Core State Standards for English language arts (ELA)/Literacy and are designed to apply to English language and literacy skills across all academic content areas, in addition to classes specifically designed for ELD. They are also designed to be used in tandem with all academic content standards—including the state standards in math and science.

The UC and the CSU require a sequence of high school courses that students must complete to be minimally eligible for admission to the UC and CSU. Schools obtain approval of their courses for admission purposes by submitting them to the UC.

A recent report by the Policy Analysis for California Education, Improving the Opportunities and Outcomes of California’s Students Learning English, found among other things, that ELs are less likely than non-ELs to be enrolled in core academic subject courses and, as a result, earn fewer credits toward graduation than non-EL students. The research further found that limited access to ELA is largely due to 1) ELD courses being used as a substitute, rather than a complement, for ELA courses, and 2) the enrollment of elementary and secondary ELs in intervention classes for language arts and math which were not designed for ELs' language and academic needs. It states that teachers and administrators report that sheltered classes (courses designed to make content more accessible to ELs) can be less rigorous, slower paced, and use more alternative curricula. This bill is an effort to respond to these concerns.

Proposed Law:

This bill prohibits a middle or high school student who is enrolled in an ELD course or who is classified as an EL from being prevented from enrolling in core curriculum courses in ELA or any other course, from taking a full course load in core subjects required for graduation, grade promotion or meeting the minimum course requirements for admission to the UC or CSU.

This bill also:

• Provides legislative intent that LEAs submit ELD courses to the UC for approval to meet the course requirements for recognition for college admission.
• Authorizes the CDE to provide guidance on making newly arrived immigrants participating in programs designed to meet the student’s academic and transitional needs exempt from the prohibition that EL students be excluded from enrolling in core curriculum courses in ELA and taking a full course load in core subjects.
• Defines “designated English language development” to mean instruction designed for ELs according to their level of English proficiency to overcome language barriers during a protected time in the regular school day in which teachers use ELD standards that build into content instruction in order to develop the critical language that ELs need for content learning in English.
• Defines “integrated English language development” to mean instruction in which all teachers with ELs in their classrooms, regardless of the course content, use ELD in tandem with the California state standards. These definitions are provided as it pertains to the ELA/ELD Framework.

Related Legislation:

AB 2785 (O’Donnell, 2016) requires the CDE to develop a manual providing guidance to LEAs on identifying, assessing, and supporting English learners who may qualify for special education services. AB 2785 is pending in this committee.

Staff Comments:

Federal law prohibits a state from denying equal educational opportunity to an individual on account of his or her race, color, sex, or national origin by the failure by an educational agency to take appropriate action to overcome language barriers that impede equal participation by its students in its instructional programs. (20 U.S.C. 1703(f)) The Supreme Court of the United States determined that for public schools to comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, they are required to take affirmative steps to ensure that ELs can meaningfully participate in their educational programs.

Federal guidance provides that from enrollment to graduation, EL students are entitled to instruction in the school district’s core curriculum (e.g., reading/language arts, math, science, and social studies). Finally, it provides that school districts should place EL students in age-appropriate grade levels so that they can have meaningful access to their grade-appropriate curricula and an equal opportunity to graduate. This bill provides greater specificity to these principles.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Senator Carol Liu, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Bill No: AB 2350

Subject: English learners

SUMMARY

This bill prohibits English learners (ELs) from being prevented from enrolling in courses required for graduation or to meet college admission requirements, requires that English Language Development (ELD) course designed for long-term ELs confer graduation credit, defines specified English language development instruction methods for purposes of the English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework, and requires the development of specified professional development materials regarding integrated English language development for voluntary use by local educational agencies.

BACKGROUND

Existing law requires the State Board to approve standards for English language development for students whose primary language is other than English. These standards are required to be comparable in rigor and specificity to the adopted standards for English language arts, mathematics, and science. (EC § 60811)

Existing law requires the State Board of Education to adopt revised curriculum frameworks that are aligned to the common core standards in English language arts by July 30, 2014. Existing law also requires State Board policies to ensure that the English Language Arts curriculum frameworks include the ELD standards and related strategies in the core subjects of mathematics, science, and history-social science. (EC § 60207)

Existing law requires that the Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CTC) issue an authorization for a teacher to provide specified services to limited-English proficient pupils and defines various terms for this purpose. (EC § 44253.2 and § 44253.3)

Existing law requires the California State University (CSU) and requests the University of California (UC) to establish a model uniform set of academic standards for high school courses that satisfy university admission requirements. In addition, both the CSU and the UC were directed to implement a speedy process whereby schools could obtain approval of their courses for admission purposes, and require that this process notify applicant schools whether a submitted course has been approved or denied by August 1 each school year. (Education Code § 66205.5)

ANALYSIS

This bill:

1. Defines “designated English language development” and “integrated English language development” instruction to align statute with the newly adopted content standards and English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework. It:
   1. Defines “designated English language development” as instruction during a protected time in the school day in which English Language Development (ELD) standards are used as focal standards in order to develop language needed for ELs to access content learning in English.
   2. Defines “integrated English language development” as instruction in which all teachers with English learners (ELs) in their classroom use English Language Development standards in tandem with content standards regardless of course content.
2. Conforms the definition of “specially designed content instruction delivered in English” within existing law relative to Commission on Teacher Credentialing authorization to teach ELs with the newly adopted content standards and English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework.
3. Provides that a middle or high school student classified as an EL or enrolled in ELD courses be granted access to core curriculum courses. Specifically it:
   1. Prohibits preventing such a student from:
      1. Enrolling in core curriculum courses required for graduation, grade promotion or to meet a-g subject requirements for college admission.
      2. Taking a full course load in subjects required for graduation, grade promotion or to meet a-g subject requirements for college admission.
   2. Makes these requirements inapplicable to a student participating in an “articulated newcomer program,” as defined.
4. Requires, if a local educational agency offers ELD courses designed for long-term ELS, that the course confer credits in English language arts necessary to meet grade promotion or graduation requirements.
5. Declares the intent of the Legislature that local educational agencies (LEAs) submit ELD courses designed for long-term ELs to the University of California (UC) and California State University (CSU) for a-g approval.
6. Requires the California Department of Education (CDE) to contract for the development of a series of vides for demonstrating best practices for implementing ELD, as specified, and requires that the videos and related documents be made available for the voluntary use of local educational agencies by the beginning of the 2019-20 school year.
7. Makes a number of technical changes.
8. Makes a number of related declarations and findings.

STAFF COMMENTS

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, recent evidence has pointed to a number of institutional barriers to English learners’ (ELs) success. These include poor access to the core curriculum and insufficient teacher preparation and professional development to address the instructional needs of ELs, particularly in light of the state’s new English Language Development (ELD) standards. This bill will ensure that ELs are not kept from enrolling in core curriculum courses necessary for graduation. It will also ensure that special courses designed for long-term ELs will allow these students to continue to move along the path toward graduation. Finally it will establish a professional development resource for teachers on California’s new ELD standards.

According to the author, ensuring access to core academic subjects and prohibiting the substitution of English language development classes for English language arts courses will begin to address the sizable gap in academic achievement that persists for ELS relative to their peers. In addition, the opportunity to address ELD needs under new standards that call for “integrated and designated” instruction will require support and professional development to realize this major shift in pedagogy.

1. Related budget activity. The provisions of the bill establishing the development of professional development materials for implementing effective ELD instruction were recently enacted in the budget. Staff recommends the bill be amended to delete section 60083 to remove these provisions from the bill.
2. English learner achievement gap. There are approximately 1.4 million English learners in California public schools, representing 22 percent of the state’s enrollment. California’s English learner students score substantially lower on state assessments than non-English learner students. While there has been incremental growth in achievement among students in both the general population and English learners, the rate of growth in the general population has significantly outpaced that of English learners and the achievement gap has widened over time.
   1. On the 2013 California Standards Tests of English language arts, 23 percent of English learners scored at the proficient or advanced levels, compared with 63 percent of English-only peers, and on the tests of mathematics 37 percent scored at those levels compared with 55 percent of their peers.
   2. On the 2015 administration of the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP), 11 percent of English learners (ELs) in all grades met or exceeded standard in English language arts/literacy and 11 percent in math, compared with 69 percent and 55 percent for those subjects, respectively, for students proficient in English.
   3. According to the California Department of Education (CDE), the overall 2013-14 four-year cohort graduation was 81 percent, while the rate for English learners was 65 percent, the lowest of any subgroup besides students in special education. The dropout rate for English learners, at 21 percent, was the highest of any subgroup.
   4. In 2014, the pass rate of English learners on the California High School Exit Examination language arts test was half the rate of English only peers (17 percent vs. 34 percent), and was also lower on the mathematics portion (13 percent vs. 20 percent).
3. Recent related report. In October 2015, the Policy Analysis for California Education's (PACE) issued, "Improving the Opportunities and Outcomes of California's Students Learning English," a report on research examining English learner needs, policies, practices, and outcomes. Among other things, researchers found that ELs are less likely than non-ELs to be enrolled in core academic subject courses and, as a result, earn fewer credits toward graduation than non-EL students. The research further found that limited access to English language arts (ELA) is largely due to 1) English Language Development (ELD) courses being used as a substitute, rather than a complement, for ELA courses, and 2) the enrollment of elementary and secondary ELs in intervention classes for language arts and math which were not designed for ELs' language and academic needs.

This research found that in one large urban school district, 30 percent of ELs were not enrolled in ELA courses, and 35 percent were not enrolled in a full course load. PACE concluded, "Research from the three partnerships suggests that English learners often suffer from restricted educational opportunity compared to that of non-English learners, particularly with regard to their academic learning needs."

The report also noted that the most common barrier to reclassification for middle and high school ELs was passage of the English Language Arts content standards criterion. Given the findings that enrollment in ELD prohibits some students from taking ELA courses; it is unclear how students are expected to obtain the course content necessary to successfully meet criteria for reclassification.

This bill, in an effort to respond to these concerns, prohibits ELs from being prevented from taking core curriculum courses necessary for graduation, grade promotion, or meeting a-g requirements for college admission.

1. Articulated newcomer programs. This bill makes its provisions requiring core curriculum access inapplicable to students participating in “articulated newcomer programs.” The intent is to grant some flexibility to districts implementing quality programs designed to meet the academic and transitional needs of newly arrived immigrants. This bill establishes an exception for a “program” which is not generally defined or acknowledged in any other state or federal statutes applicable to English learners.

Staff recommends the bill be amended on page 6 to delete lines 3-18 and insert

“(b) Subdivision (a) shall not apply to a pupil participating in a program designed to meet the academic and transitional needs of newly arrived immigrants unless the pupil meets the local educational agency’s exit criteria for transition into a general education program. The department may provide guidance on the implementation of this subdivision.”

1. Can ELD courses be more rigorous? This bill requires that districts confer credit for purposes of grade promotion or graduation for ELD courses specially designed for long-term English learners (ELs). According to California Department of Education (CDE), preliminary data indicates that about 26.5 percent (90,000) of ELs that had been in a U.S. school for more than six years are long-term ELs.

According to the author, some school districts have begun designing courses for long-term ELs which are both English Language Development (ELD) and English Language Arts (ELA) courses, and which offer credit toward graduation requirements. This practice addresses the issue of access to the core curriculum and also the "crowding out" of EL students' schedules, a problem which occurs when the need to take courses in both ELD and ELA prevents students from enrolling in other courses.

Additionally, current California State University (CSU) and University of California (UC) policy allows advanced-level English courses for second language learners to be approved to meet the English ("b") subject requirement, provided that they meet specified measures of rigor and are comparable to other mainstream college-preparatory English courses. UC does not grant credit for an ELD course taken during the senior year. Sheltered English and Specially designed academic instruction in English courses can be approved as meeting "a-g" requirements without approval, but ESL and ELD courses must be submitted separately for approval.

As currently drafted, the bill would require that an ELD course designed for long-term ELs be granted graduation or grade promotion credit. But should credit be extended if a district offers a course that is not rigorous?

Staff recommends the bill be amended on page 6, line 21 to insert “be sufficiently rigorous to” after “shall”, to ensure that school districts are designing ELD courses that ensure long-term ELs are receiving content that prepares them for graduation.

1. Course approval for college admissions. Generally, the process of assessing the suitability of specific courses for meeting subject area requirements has been in the purview of the faculty of the UC, through the Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools (BOARS) which oversees all matters relating to the admissions of undergraduate students. A course's "a-g" approval is based on the “a-g” course evaluation guidelines and the subject-specific course criteria established by UC faculty. California high schools can submit their courses to UC for “a-g” certification and once approved, the "a-g" course is added to the school's "a-g" course list.

In 2003, both the CSU and the UC made slight changes to their “a-g” subject matter requirements in order to align them for any students wishing to apply to both universities. Since then, the CSU has deferred recommendations of additions or revisions to the “a-g” subject matter requirements to the UC. According to the CSU, campuses generally use the UC’s a-g determination for evaluation of courses for purposes of admission.

This bill makes reference to a-g requirements in several places, including articulation of intent that courses be submitted to the California State University (CSU) for approval as such. Staff notes that the classification of courses as meeting a-g requirements is established via policy of the University of California (UC) faculty and is not currently a classification that is, or should be, specified in statute. However, the a-g classification is the current means by which the UC responds to statutory direction to establish a model uniform set of standards for high school courses for purposes of recognition for UC and CSU admissions, pursuant to section 66205.5.

Staff recommends the bill be amended on page 6, lines 24 and 25 to delete “and California State University” as the CSU plays no role in a-g course review.

Staff further recommends the bill be amended to replace “a-g subject requirements” with “subject matter requirements for purposes of recognition for college admission pursuant to section 66205.5.”

1. Evolution of ELD instruction. This bill defines English Language Development (ELD) instruction to align statute with the newly adopted English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework, which offers guidance for providing all California students with English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. In addition, it offers guidance for supporting English learners' progress in English language development.

Instruction for English learners has evolved significantly in the last 40 years. Initial “English as a Second Language” (ESL) approaches used from 1900 to the 1970’s focused solely on English acquisition. Content-based ESL emerged in the 1980’s, providing support for English acquisition through academic content. Models known as Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English and Sheltered English, in use from the 1980’s to the present day, have focused on providing English learners access to content through modified (sometimes referred to as “scaffolded”) instruction.

The English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework adopted by the State Board of Education in 2014 provides a comprehensive strategy for meeting both the content and language learning needs of ELs. This model is known as the “integrated and designated” model of ELD. Under this model,

“integrated ELD instruction” occurs throughout the school day in every subject area by every teacher who has an EL student in the classroom. The California ELD Standards are used in tandem with the California Common Core State Standards for ELA/Literacy and other content standards to ensure students strengthen their abilities to use academic English as they learn content through English. “Designated ELD” is provided to ELs during a protected time in the regular school day, during which teachers use the ELD Standards as the focal standards in ways that build into and from content instruction to develop critical language ELs need for content learning in English.

According to the California Department of Education, curriculum frameworks offer guidance for implementing content standards and describe the curriculum and instruction necessary to help students achieve proficiency. They specify the design of instructional materials and professional development. In 2015 the State Board of Education approved a list of adopted instructional materials aligned to the newly adopted English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework. Local educational agencies (LEAs) are expected to select from the adopted instructional materials within the next few years.

1. Related legislation. AB 2785 (O’Donnell) also on the committee’s agenda today, requires the California Department of Education to develop a manual for the purpose of providing guidance to LEA on identifying, assessing, and supporting, English learners who may qualify for special education services by July 1, 2018.

SUPPORT

Association of California School Administrators

Association of California School Administrators

California Association for Bilingual Education

California Federation of Teachers

California Immigrant Policy Center

California State PTA

California Teachers Association

Californians Together

Education Trust West

Los Angeles Unified School District

Riverside County Superintendent of Schools

Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson (sponsor)

OPPOSITION

None received.

-- END --

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:

Author:(O'Donnell)

As Amended Ver:May 27, 2016

Majority vote

SUMMARY: Prohibits English learners (ELs) in middle and high school from being prevented from enrolling in core curriculum courses and courses required for graduation, requires that courses designed for long term English learners (LTELs) be offered for graduation credit, and requires the California Department of Education (CDE) to create a video-based professional development series on English Language Development (ELD) and revise a publication on improving instruction for ELs. Specifically, this bill:

1. Prohibits a middle or high school student who is enrolled in an English language development course or who is classified as an English learner from being prevented from doing either of the following:
2. Enrolling in core curriculum courses in English language arts or any other course required for graduation, grade promotion, or meeting the a-g subject requirements for admission to the University of California (UC) or the California State University (CSU)
3. Taking a full course load in core subjects required for graduation, grade promotion, or meeting the a-g subject requirements for admission to the UC or CSU
4. States that this requirement does not apply to a student participating in an articulated newcomer program unless the student meets the local educational agency's (LEA's) exit criteria for transition into a general education program. Defines, for purposes of this requirement, "articulated newcomer program" as a separate, sometimes self-contained program that meets all of the following criteria:
5. The program is designed to meet the academic and transitional needs of newly arrived immigrants
6. Instruction is aligned with state academic content standards in content areas for which standards are adopted
7. Instruction for learning English is aligned with ELD standards
8. When possible, instruction in the core subjects of mathematics, science, and history-social science are offered in the student's primary language
9. Requires that, if an LEA offers a course designed for LTELs, that the course confer credits in English language arts necessary to meet graduation or grade promotion requirements. States the intent of the Legislature that LEAs submit those courses to the UC and the CSU for approval to meet a-g subject requirements for admission.
10. Requires the CDE to contract for the development of a series of videos demonstrating best practices for implementing designated and integrated ELD in grades transitional Kindergarten through grade 12, and make the series available on the CDE website; and requires the CDE to revise its existing research-based guidance document on improving the education of English learners. Requires that in developing the series the CDE to:
11. Compile program models that address the implementation of designated and integrated ELD instruction during the school day that allows students to access ELD and academic content
12. Convene a group of experts and request public input
13. Complete the series and revised document by the beginning of the 2019–20 school year
14. States that implementation of requirement to produce the video series and revised document is contingent upon funding being provided for this purpose in the annual Budget Act or another statute.
15. Defines "integrated and designated" ELD as used in the ELD standards. States that the English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework adopted by the State Board of Education in 2014 states that English learners at all levels require both integrated and designated ELD, defined as follows:
16. Designated ELD: instruction designed for ELs according to their level of English proficiency to overcome language barriers in a reasonable amount of time, during a protected time in the regular school day, in which teachers use the ELD standards in ways that build into and from content instruction in order to develop critical language they need for content learning in English
17. Integrated ELD: instruction in which all teachers with ELs in their classrooms, regardless of course content, use the California ELD standards in tandem with the state content standards
18. Changes the term "limited English proficient" to "English learner" in a section related to credentialing of teachers to serve English learners, and aligns the definition of "specially designed content instruction in English" with the one used in the state's ELD standards.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, administrative costs to the CDE of approximately $1.2 million (federal Title III), over three years, to develop best practices videos and update guidance documents on instruction.

COMMENTS:

Need for the bill. The author's office states: "The achievement gap between California's English learners and their peers is a central challenge facing in our public education system.

"California's English learner students score substantially lower on state assessments than non-English learner students, graduate from high school at lower rates, and attend postsecondary institutions at lower rates. While there has been incremental growth in achievement among students in both the general population and English learners, the rate of growth in the general population has significantly outpaced that of English learners. As a result, the achievement gap has actually widened over time. Results from the first administration of our Common Core-aligned assessments suggest that the gap may be widening further.

"Recent evidence has pointed to a number of institutional barriers to English learners' success, including secondary English learners' poor access to the core curriculum and insufficient teacher preparation and professional development to address the instructional needs of English learners, particularly in light of the state's new English language development standards.

"AB 2350 will improve English learners' access to the core curriculum and will support educators in improving English language development instruction. This bill will ensure that English learners are not held back from enrolling in core curriculum courses necessary for graduation, and it will ensure that special courses designed for long term English learners are credit-bearing. And it will establish a professional development resource for teachers on California's groundbreaking English language development standards. These standards represent provide new and promising opportunities to meet the language and content learning needs of our students."

English learner achievement gap. There are approximately 1.4 million English learners in California public schools, representing 22% of the state's enrollment. 2.7 million students speak a language other than English in their homes, representing about 43% of the state's public school enrollment. 73% of English learners are enrolled in the elementary grades, and 27% are enrolled in the secondary grades. One in three English learners in the United States resides in California.

California's English learner students score substantially lower on state assessments and other measures of achievement than non-English learner students. While there has been incremental growth in achievement on state assessments among all students over time, the rate of growth in the non-English learner population has significantly outpaced that of English learners. As a result, the achievement gap has widened over time. Data from state sources indicates:

1. On the 2015 administration of the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP), 11% of English learners in all grades met or exceeded standard in English language arts/literacy and 11% in math, compared with 69% and 55% for those subjects, respectively, for students proficient in English.
2. A report by the Public Policy Institute of California found that in a relatively large number of schools, no EL students scored at or above the standards for English language arts (ELA) and math on the CAASPP assessment. The report notes that, in the past, 30% of districts required ELs to meet the ELA standard on the California Standards Test to be reclassified.
3. Graduation rates for English learners are lower compared to the general population and other subgroups. The 2013-14 four-year cohort graduation was 81%, while the rate for English learners was 65%, the lowest of any subgroup besides students in special education. The dropout rate for English learners, at 21%, was the highest of any subgroup.
4. In 2014, the pass rate of English learners on the California High School Exit Examination language arts test was half the rate of English only peers (17% vs. 34%), and was also lower on the mathematics portion (13% vs. 20%).
5. Data from 2008-09 show that English learners high school graduates attend postsecondary institutions at the rate of 52%, compared with 74% of English-only students.

When viewing this data it is important to note that English learners who have achieved proficiency in English and have been reclassified are no longer included in the English learner subgroup.

Access to the core curriculum for English learners. This bill addresses English learners' access to core curriculum courses in middle and high school by prohibiting ELs from being prevented from taking core curriculum courses and courses necessary for graduation.

Policy Analysis for California Education's (PACE) 2015 report, "Improving the Opportunities and Outcomes of California's Students Learning English," reported that ELs are less likely than non-ELs to be enrolled in core academic subject courses and, as a result, earn fewer credits toward graduation than non-EL students. The research further found that limited access to ELA is largely due to 1) ELD courses being used as a substitute, rather than a complement, for ELA courses, and 2) the enrollment of elementary and secondary ELs in intervention classes for language arts and math which were not designed for ELs' language and academic needs.

This research found that in one large urban school district, 30% of ELs were not enrolled in ELA courses, and 35% were not enrolled in a full course load. PACE reported that this research "suggests that English learners often suffer from restricted educational opportunity compared to that of non-English learners, particularly with regard to their academic learning needs." The report also noted that, while some students were prohibited from taking ELA courses because they were enrolled in ELD courses, the content area preventing ELs from being reclassified was generally ELA itself. This finding suggests that some English learners are stuck in a kind of trap - unable to access ELA courses until they are proficient in ELA.

Analysis Prepared by: Tanya Lieberman / ED. / (916) 319-2087 FN: 0003341

Date of Hearing: May 4, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Lorena Gonzalez, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2350

Author:(O'Donnell) – As Amended Ver:April 19, 2016

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

SUMMARY:

This bill prohibits English learners (ELs) in middle and high school from being prevented from enrolling in core curriculum courses and courses required for graduation, requires that courses designed for long term English learners (LTELs) be offered for graduation credit, and requires the California Department of Education (CDE) to create a video-based professional development series on integrated and designated English Language Development (ELD). Specifically, this bill:

1. Prohibits a middle or high school pupil who is enrolled in an ELD course, or who is classified as an EL, from being prevented from the following:
   1. Enrolling in core curriculum courses in English language arts or any other course required for graduation or to meet the a-g subject requirements for admission to the University of California (UC) or the California State University (CSU).
   2. Taking a full course load in core subjects required for graduation or to meet the a-g subject requirements for admission to the UC or CSU.
2. Specifies this prohibition does not apply to a pupil participating in an articulated newcomer program unless the pupil meets the local educational agency’s exit criteria for transition into a general education program. “Articulated newcomer program” is defined as a separate, sometimes self-contained program that is designed to meet the academic and transitional needs of newly arrived immigrants and is aligned to the standards, as specified.
3. Requires, if a local education agency (LEA) offers a course for LTELs, the course to confer credits in English language arts necessary to meet graduation requirements. Specifies Legislative intent that LEAs submit those courses to the University of California and California State University for approval to meet the a-g subject requirements for admission.
4. Defines, for the purposes of the English Language Arts/English Language Development (ELA/ELD) Framework, the following:
   1. “Designated English language development” means instruction designed for English learners according to their level of English proficiency to overcome language barriers in a reasonable amount of time, during a protected time in the regular schoolday, in which teachers use the California English Language Development Standards as the focal standards in ways that build into and from content instruction in order to develop the critical language that English learners need for content learning in English.
   2. “Integrated English language development” means instruction in which all teachers with English learners in their classrooms, regardless of the course content, use the California English Language Development Standards in tandem with the California state standards.
5. Requires the CDE to contract for the development of a series of videos demonstrating best practices, as specified, for implementing designated and integrated ELD in transitional kindergarten through 12 grade and make the series available on the department’s website. Requires CDE to convene a group of experts and request public input in the development of the videos. Requires the videos to be completed and made available by the beginning of the 2018-19 school year.

FISCAL EFFECT:

Administrative costs to the CDE of approximately $1.2 million (federal Title III), over three years, to develop best practices videos and update guidance documents on instruction. CDE would contract with an outside consultant to produce the video series, convene a panel of experts, receive public comment and submit to the SBE for approval in the first 18 months of the project. CDE would then make the videos available on a digital platform and provide statewide technical assistance for administrators and teachers. The last 12 months would be dedicated to updating the research and guidance document and completing the development of resources for teachers and administrators.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. The achievement gap between California’s English learners and their peers is a central challenge facing in our public education system. California’s English learner students score substantially lower on state assessments than non-English learner students, graduate from high school at lower rates, and attend postsecondary institutions at lower rates. The state has focused on ensuring that all students are college or career ready, however, barriers exist for English learners including poor access to the core curriculum and insufficient teacher preparation and professional development to address the instructional needs of English learners, particularly in light of the state’s new English language development standards.

This bill, co-sponsored by Californian's Together and the Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson, seeks to improve English learners’ access to the core curriculum and support educators in improving English language development instruction.

1. Background. There are approximately 1.4 million English learners in California public schools, representing 22% of the state’s enrollment. 2.7 million students speak a language other than English in their homes, representing about 43 percent of the state's public school enrollment. 73% of English learners are enrolled in the elementary grades, and 27% are enrolled in the secondary grades. One in three English learners in the U.S. resides in California.

Over the past 6 years, the California legislature has passed key legislation for the development of state standards and frameworks. The CDE has produced, and the State Board of Education (SBE) has approved, state content standards for mathematics, science, English language arts and ELD. The SBE has also approved frameworks, and documents to ensure ELD is aligned to the rigor of content standards.

Alignment with ELD and the content standards has necessitated a shift in pedagogy so that language development is relevant and consistent throughout the full day of instruction. Teachers are struggling with what this looks like in the classroom. To address this need, the CDE submitted a budget request in April to the Department of Finance to revise the Improving Education for English Learners: Research-Based Approaches publication of 2009 and to produce a video series demonstrating current implementation practices of the pedagogy. This request was not approved. CDE has resubmitted the request for consideration in the May Revise.

This bill addresses the video component of CDE's request. The author has stated they may amend the bill to include the publication update.

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 2350 (

Author:O'Donnell) – As Amended Ver:March 28, 2016

SUBJECT: English learners

SUMMARY: Prohibits English learners (ELs) in middle and high school from being prevented from enrolling in core curriculum courses and courses required for graduation, requires that courses designed for long term English learners (LTELs) be offered for graduation credit, and requires the California Department of Education (CDE) to create a video-based professional development series on integrated and designated English Language Development (ELD).

Specifically, this bill:

1. Makes findings and declarations relative to the achievement gap between English learners and other students.
2. Prohibits, with the exception of articulated newcomer programs, a middle or high school student who is an English learner or who is enrolled in an English language development course from being prevented from either of the following:
   1. enrolling in core curriculum courses in English language arts or any other course required for graduation or to meet the a-g subject requirements for admission to the University of California (UC) or the California State University (CSU)
   2. taking a full course load in core subjects required for graduation to meet the a-g subject requirements for admission to the UC or the CSU
3. Requires that, if a local educational agency (LEA) offers a course designed for LTELs, that course confer credits in English language arts necessary to meet graduation requirements. States the intent of the Legislature that LEAs submit those courses to the UC and the CSU for approval to meet a-g subject requirements for admission.
4. States that the English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework adopted by the State Board of Education (SBE) in 2014 states that English learners at all levels require both integrated and designated ELD, defined as follows:
   1. designated ELD: instruction designed for ELs according to their level of English proficiency to overcome language barriers in a reasonable amount of time, during a protected time in the regular school day, in which teachers use the ELD standards in ways that build into and from content instruction in order to develop critical language they need for content learning in English.
   2. integrated ELD: instruction in which all teachers with ELs in their classrooms, regardless of course content, use the California ELD standards in tandem with the state content standards
5. Requires the CDE to contract for the development of a series of videos demonstrating best practices for implementing designated and integrated ELD in grades transitional Kindergarten through grade 12, and make the series available on the CDE website. Requires that:
6. in developing the series the CDE convene a group of experts and request public comment
7. the series be designed to assist LEAs in providing instruction in designated and integrated ELD
8. the series be completed and available for use by the 2017-18 academic year
9. the CDE compile and include in the series program models that address the structuring of the school day to allow for instruction in the full curriculum and ELD, and means of implementing these models.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires the State Board of Education (SBE) to approve standards for English language development for students whose primary language is a language other than English. Requires that these standards be comparable in rigor and specificity to the adopted standards for English language arts, the standards for mathematics, and the standards for science.
2. Establishes state high school graduation requirements, including three courses in English. Permits local educational agencies to adopt additional requirements for graduation which exceed those of the state.
3. Defines “English learner” or “student of limited English proficiency,” and requires each school district to assess the English language development of each of those students within 30 days of initial enrollment and annually thereafter until the students are redesignated as fluent English proficient.
4. Requires the CDE, with the approval of the SBE, to establish procedures for the reclassification of a student from English learner to English proficient. Requires that the reclassification procedures developed by the CDE use multiple criteria in determining whether to reclassify a student, including, but not limited to, all of the following:
   1. assessment of language proficiency using an objective assessment instrument, including, but not limited to, the California English Language Development Test (CELDT)
   2. teacher evaluation, including, but not limited to, a review of the student’s curriculum mastery
   3. parent opinion and consultation
   4. comparison of the performance of the student in basic skills with those of his or her peers
5. Defines an LTEL as an English learner who meets all of the following criteria:
   1. is enrolled in any of grades 6 to 12, inclusive
   2. has been enrolled in schools in the United States for six years or more
   3. has remained at the same English language proficiency level for two or more consecutive prior years, or has regressed to a lower English language proficiency level, as determined by the English language development test or a score determined by the Superintendent on any successor test
   4. for a student in any of grades 6 to 9, has scored far below basic or below basic on the prior year’s English language arts test, or a score determined by the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) on any successor test
6. Requires that the CDE annually ascertain and report the number of students who are, or are at risk of becoming, long-term English learners and to provide this information to school districts and schools.
7. Title VI of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits recipients of federal financial assistance, including school districts, from discriminating on the basis of race, color, or national origin. Title VI’s prohibition on national origin discrimination requires school districts to take “affirmative steps” to address language barriers so that EL students may participate meaningfully in schools’ educational programs.

FISCAL EFFECT: This bill has been keyed a state-mandated local program by the Office of Legislative Counsel

COMMENTS:

Need for the bill. The author’s office states: “The achievement gap between California’s English learners and their peers is a central challenge facing in our public education system.

California’s English learner students score substantially lower on state assessments than non-English learner students, graduate from high school at lower rates, and attend postsecondary institutions at lower rates. While there has been incremental growth in achievement among students in both the general population and English learners, the rate of growth in the general population has significantly outpaced that of English learners. As a result, the achievement gap has actually widened over time. Results from the first administration of our Common Core-aligned assessments suggest that the gap may be widening further.

As our state focuses on ensuring that every student is college or career ready, we must address barriers and support effective practices so that our system is worthy of our students’ potential. Recent evidence has pointed to a number of institutional barriers to English learners’ success, including secondary English learners’ poor access to the core curriculum and insufficient teacher preparation and professional development to address the instructional needs of English learners, particularly in light of the state’s new English language development standards.

AB 2350 will improve English learners’ access to the core curriculum and will support educators in improving English language development instruction. This bill will ensure that English learners are not held back from enrolling in core curriculum courses necessary for graduation. It will ensure that special courses designed for long term English learners these students continue to move students along the path toward graduation. And it will establish a professional development resource for teachers on California’s groundbreaking English language development standards. These standards represent provide new and promising opportunities to meet the language and content learning needs of our students.”

English learner achievement gap. There are approximately 1.4 million English learners in California public schools, representing 22% of the state’s enrollment. 2.7 million students speak a language other than English in their homes, representing about 43 percent of the state's public school enrollment. 73% of English learners are enrolled in the elementary grades, and 27% are enrolled in the secondary grades. One in three English learners in the U.S. resides in California.

California’s English learner students score substantially lower on state assessments than non-English learner students. While there has been incremental growth in achievement among students in both the general population and English learners, the rate of growth in the general population has significantly outpaced that of English learners. As a result, the achievement gap has widened over time.

• On the state’s California Standards Tests (CSTs) of English language arts in grades 3, 5, 8, and 10, the gap between English learners and their peers widened between 2003 and 2009.
• On the 2013 CSTs of English language arts, 23% of English learners scored at the proficient or advanced levels, compared with 63% of English-only peers, and on the tests of mathematics 37%% scored at those levels compared with 55%% of their peers.
• On the 2015 administration of the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP), 11 percent of English learners in all grades met or exceeded standard in English language arts/literacy and 11 percent in math, compared with 69 percent and 55 percent for those subjects, respectively, for students proficient in English. While it is not possible to draw direct comparisons between the above CAASPP results and those from the CSTs, there is at least a strong suggestion that the achievement gap relative to Common Core standards is even greater.
• Graduation rates for English learners are also lower compared to the general population and other subgroups. According to the CDE, the overall 2013-14 four-year cohort graduation was 81%, while the rate for English learners was 65%, the lowest of any subgroup besides students in special education. The dropout rate for English learners, at 21%, was the highest of any subgroup.
• In 2014, the pass rate of English learners on the California High School Exit Examination language arts test was half the rate of English only peers (17% vs. 34%), and was also lower on the mathematics portion (13% vs. 20%).
• Data from 2008-09 show that English learners high school graduates attend postsecondary institutions at the rate of 52%, compared with 74% of English-only students.

When viewing this data it is important to note that English learners who have achieved proficiency in English and have been reclassified are no longer included in the English learner subgroup.

Recent reports highlight key policy issues related to the achievement gap. A number of organizations have recently produced reports and policy briefs on the English learner achievement gap in California. Publications by Californians Together, Policy Analysis for California Education, EdTrust West, and the Civil Rights Project at the University of California, Los Angeles addressed a variety of issues, but generally aligned around the need to:

• Improve reclassification policy
• Increase ELs’ access to core academic courses
• Improve data collection and reporting
• Support biliteracy as a viable strategy
• Improve teacher preparation and professional development to address needs of ELs

This bill addresses two of these issues: access to the core curriculum for ELs, and professional development to address the instructional needs of ELs.

The issues of data reporting and statewide reclassification policy are not addressed by this bill, but they are addressed by the new federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), as described later in this analysis. Reclassification is also the subject of a bill this Session (AB 491, Gonzalez) which is pending in the Senate.

The issue of biliteracy is addressed by an initiative which will appear before the voters at the November, 2016 election. This measure was placed on the ballot by the Legislature through its approval of SB 1174 (Lara, Chapter 753, Statutes of 2014). If approved by the voters, this measure would amend and repeal various provisions of Proposition 227 of 1998, including repealing the requirement that all children be taught English by being taught in English, and instead would allow LEAs, in consultation with language experts in the field and parents, to determine the best language instruction methods and language acquisition programs to implement.

Access to the core curriculum for English learners. This bill addresses English learners’ access to core curriculum courses in middle and high school by prohibiting ELs from being prevented from taking core curriculum courses and courses necessary for graduation.

Policy Analysis for California Education’s (PACE) 2015 report, “Improving the Opportunities and Outcomes of California’s Students Learning English,” reported findings from research conducted by three school district–university research partnerships focused on examining English learner needs, policies, practices, and outcomes. This research found that ELs are less likely than non-ELs to be enrolled in core academic subject courses and, as a result, earn fewer credits toward graduation than non-EL students. The research further found that limited access to ELA is largely due to 1) ELD courses being used as a substitute, rather than a complement, for ELA courses, and 2) the enrollment of elementary and secondary ELs in intervention classes for language arts and math which were not designed for ELs’ language and academic needs.

This research found that in one large urban school district, 30% of ELs were not enrolled in ELA courses, and 35% were not enrolled in a full course load. PACE concluded, “research from the three partnerships suggests that English learners often suffer from restricted educational opportunity compared to that of non-English learners, particularly with regard to their academic learning needs.”

The report also noted that, while some students were prohibited from taking ELA courses because they were enrolled in ELD courses, the content area preventing ELs from being reclassified was generally ELA itself. This finding suggests that some English learners are stuck in a kind of trap - unable to access ELA courses until they are proficient in ELA.

Credit-bearing LTEL courses. This bill requires that districts offering courses specially designed for long term English learners be offered as credit-bearing courses.

The first data available identifying the number and percentage of LTELs was produced by the CDE in draft form in December, 2014 and provided to school districts and county offices of education. These data reflected the LTEL definition in the law prior to recent changes required by SB 750 (Mendoza, Chapter 660, Statutes of 2015). The 2014 data indicate the following:

• Of the approximately 471,000 English learners in grades 6-12 (who were not previously reclassified), approximately 339,000 had been in a U.S. school for more than six years.
• Of the approximately 339,000 English learners who have been in U.S. schools for more than six years, approximately 90,000 are LTELs. This represents 26.5% of the population which could be identified under the law at that time (note that this percentage applies to the group of English learners who were not previously reclassified).

Some school districts have begun designing courses for LTELs which are both ELD and ELA courses, and which offer credit toward graduation requirements. This practice addresses both the issue of access to the core curriculum and also the “crowding out” of EL students’ schedules, a problem which occurs when the need to take courses in both ELD and ELA prevents students from enrolling in other courses. To assist LEAs in developing and offering credit-bearing courses for English learners which meet these requirements, staff recommends that this be amended to require that the video professional development modules required by this bill include information on developing credit-bearing ELD courses.

Districts which have created credit-bearing LTEL courses include Los Angeles Unified School District, Anaheim Union High School District, and Ventura Unified School District. Los Angeles Unified School District also sought and obtained “A-G” credit (for CSU and UC admissions) for their LTEL course, an additional step encouraged by this bill (see below for more information on the treatment of ELD courses for UC and CSU admissions credit).

“Integrated and designated” English language development and the need for professional development. This bill defines “integrated and designated” ELD, and requires the CDE to provide video-based professional development on how to implement this instructional model.

Instruction for English learners has evolved significantly in the last 40 years, from an emphasis solely on English acquisition to a focus on access to content, to the current “integrated and designated” model. Initial “English as a Second Language” (ESL) approaches used from 1900 to the 1970’s focused solely on English acquisition. Content-based ESL emerged in the 1980’s, providing support for English acquisition through academic content. Models known as Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English and Sheltered English, in use from the 1980’s to the present day, have focused on providing English learners access to content through modified (sometimes referred to as “scaffolded”) instruction.

The English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework adopted by the State Board of Education in 2014 provides a comprehensive strategy for meeting both the content and language learning needs of ELs. This model is known as the “integrated and designated” model of ELD, defined in this bill as follows:

• Integrated ELD instruction occurs throughout the school day in every subject area by every teacher who has an EL student in the classroom. The CA ELD Standards are used in tandem with the California Common Core State Standards for ELA/Literacy and other content standards to ensure students strengthen their abilities to use academic English as they learn content through English.
• Designated ELD is provided to ELs during a protected time in the regular school day. Teachers use the California ELD Standards as the focal standards in ways that build into and from content instruction to develop critical language ELs need for content learning in English. Ideally, students are grouped for designated ELD by English language proficiency levels (Emerging, Expanding, Bridging), although schools need to consider their particular student population (e.g., number of ELs at each proficiency level) and make appropriate decisions about grouping.

In 2015 the SBE approved a list of adopted instructional materials aligned to this framework, and LEAs will be piloting and selecting instructional materials in the next few years.

There is wide acknowledgement that this shift to designated and integrated instruction represents a major shift in pedagogy, and that teachers will require support in implementing this model. There appears to be a local demand for technical assistance and professional development; CDE reports that they have received requests for guidance in implementing this model.

The CDE is also in the process of developing a new assessment for English learners to replace the CELDT. This test, known as the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (ELPAC), will be administered by 2018, and will be aligned with the 2012 California English Language Development Standards. It will be comprised of two separate ELP assessments: one for the initial identification of students as ELs, and a second for the annual summative assessment to measure a student’s progress in learning English and to identify the student's level of English proficiency.

ELD courses to fulfill the “A-G” course requirements. This bill encourages school districts offering courses designed for LTELs to submit those courses for approval as “A-G” courses for the purpose of UC and CSU admissions.

Current CSU and UC policy allows advanced-level English courses for second language learners to be approved to meet the English (“b”) subject requirement, provided that they meet specified measures of rigor and are comparable to other mainstream college-preparatory English courses. This policy allows students to use a maximum of one year of ELD coursework to count toward the four-year English requirement. UC does not grant credit for an ELD course taken during the senior year. Sheltered English and SDAIE courses can be approved as meeting “A-G” requirements without approval, but ESL and ELD courses must be submitted separately for approval.

ESSA’s new requirements regarding English learners. The federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), signed into law in 2015, establishes new requirements relating to the education of English learners. According to the Council of Chief State School Officers, ESSA includes new requirements to:

• Report on number and percentage of ELs 1) meeting state-determined long-term goals, disaggregated by disability, 2) attaining English proficiency, 3) meeting challenging state academic standards for 4 years after exiting, disaggregated by disability, and 4) who have not attained proficiency within 5 years of classification
• Include ELs’ progress in attaining proficiency in English in state accountability systems (instead of solely within the Title III program)
• Use standardized statewide entrance and exit procedures for identifying ELs.
• Align state ELD assessments with state ELA proficiency standards.
• (Permits states to) use scores of reclassified ELs for up to four years after reclassification, in the EL subgroup for purposes of state accountability systems

Recommended amendments. Staff recommends the following amendments to meet the author’s intent:

1. Re-order one intent section and on page 3 line 30 strike “the” and add “English”
2. On page 4 lines 11-12, amend the reference to newcomer programs to ensure consistency with federal law.
3. On page 4 line 31 replace “in 2014” with a reference to the section authorizing the ELA framework revision
4. On page 5 line 26, change “comment” to “input.”
5. On page 5 line 31 change “2017-18” to “2018-19” to change the date by which the video series must be completed.
6. On page 5 line 33, after “agencies” add “and charter schools.”
7. Clarify that the requirements in subdivision a) apply to middle schools as applicable.
8. On page 4, line 3, after “require” insert a comprehensive program of English Language development that includes”
9. On page 5, line 22, replace “the full curriculum” with “academic content.”
10. As noted above, add a requirement that the professional development modules required by this bill include information on developing credit-bearing ELD courses at the secondary level.
11. Add a section amending the current definition of specially designed academic instruction in English to conform to the “designated” and “integrated” ELD model.

Related legislation. AB 491 (Gonzales) of this Session requires the CDE to recommend, and the SBE to adopt, best practices for the reclassification of English learners, by July 2022. AB 491 largely extends a requirement in current law SB 1108 (Padilla), Chapter 434, Statutes of 2012, which was never fulfilled.

SB 1174 (Lara), Chapter 753, Statutes of 2014, if approved by the voters, would amend and repeal various provisions of Proposition 227 of 1998, including repealing the requirement that all children be taught English by being taught in English, and instead would allow LEAs, in consultation with language experts in the field and parents, to determine the best language instruction methods and language acquisition programs to implement.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Californians Together (co-sponsor)

State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson (co-sponsor)

California Association for Bilingual Education

Los Angeles Unified School District

Opposition

None received

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