Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to allow pupils whom the district has determined would benefit from advanced scholastic or vocational work to attend community college as special part-time or full-time students, subject to parental permission. Existing law requires credit to be awarded to these pupils, as specified, authorizes a school principal to recommend a pupil for community college summer session if the pupil meets specified criteria, and prohibits the principal from recommending more than 5% of the total number of pupils from any particular grade level who completed that grade immediately before the time of recommendation for summer session attendance.

This bill would authorize the governing board of a community college district to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways partnership with the governing board of a school district with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to community college for career technical education or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness. The bill would require the partnership agreement to outline the terms of the partnership, as specified, and to establish protocols for information sharing, joint facilities use, and parental consent for high school pupils to enroll in community college courses.

The bill would authorize specified high school pupils to enroll in up to 15 units per term if those units are required for these pupils partnership programs and specified conditions are satisfied, and would authorize a community college district to exempt special part-time and full-time students taking up to a maximum of 15 units per term from specified fee requirements. The bill would prohibit a district from receiving a state allowance or apportionment for an instructional activity for which the partnering district has been, or will be, paid an allowance or apportionment under a concurrent enrollment partnership agreement. The bill would require, for each partnership agreement entered into under the bill, the affected community college district and school district to provide an annual report, containing specified data, to the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges. The bill would require the chancellor to prepare a summary report, no later than January 1, 2021, that includes an evaluation of the partnerships, as specified. The bills provisions would be repealed on January 1, 2022.

Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to allow pupils whom the district has determined would benefit from advanced scholastic or vocational work to attend community college as special part-time or full-time students, subject to parental permission. Existing law requires credit to be awarded to these pupils, as specified, authorizes a school principal to recommend a pupil for community college summer session if the pupil meets specified criteria, and prohibits the principal from recommending more than 5% of the total number of pupils from any particular grade level who completed that grade immediately before the time of recommendation for summer session attendance.

This bill would authorize the governing board of a community college district to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways partnership with the governing board of a school district with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to community college for career technical education or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness. The bill would require the partnership agreement to outline the terms of the partnership, as specified, and to establish protocols for information sharing, joint facilities use, and parental consent for high school pupils to enroll in community college courses.

The bill would authorize specified high school pupils to enroll in up to 15 units per term if those units are required for these pupils partnership programs and specified conditions are satisfied, and would authorize a community college district to exempt special part-time and full-time students taking up to a maximum of 15 units per term from specified fee requirements. The bill would prohibit a district from receiving a state allowance or apportionment for an instructional activity for which the partnering district has been, or will be, paid an allowance or apportionment under a concurrent enrollment partnership agreement. The bill would require, for each partnership agreement entered into under the bill, the affected community college district and school district to provide an annual report, containing specified data, to the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges. The bill would require the chancellor to prepare a summary report, no later than January 1, 2021, that includes an evaluation of the partnerships, as specified. The bills provisions would be repealed on January 1, 2022.

Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to allow pupils whom the district has determined would benefit from advanced scholastic or vocational work to attend community college as special part-time or full-time students, subject to parental permission. Existing law requires credit to be awarded to these pupils, as specified, authorizes a school principal to recommend a pupil for community college summer session if the pupil meets specified criteria, and prohibits the principal from recommending more than 5% of the total number of pupils from any particular grade level who completed that grade immediately before the time of recommendation for summer session attendance.

This bill would authorize the governing board of a community college district to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways partnership with the governing board of a school district with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to community college for career technical education or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness. The bill would require the partnership agreement to outline the terms of the partnership, as specified, and to establish protocols for information sharing, joint facilities use, and parental consent for high school pupils to enroll in community college courses.

The bill would authorize specified high school pupils to enroll in up to 15 units per term if those units are required for these pupils partnership programs and specified conditions are satisfied, and would authorize a community college district to exempt special part-time and full-time students taking up to a maximum of 15 units per term from specified fee requirements. The bill would prohibit a district from receiving a state allowance or apportionment for an instructional activity for which the partnering district has been, or will be, paid an allowance or apportionment under a concurrent enrollment partnership agreement. The bill would require, for each partnership agreement entered into under the bill, the affected community college district and school district to provide an annual report, containing specified data, to the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges. The bill would require the chancellor to prepare a summary report, no later than January 1, 2021, that includes an evaluation of the partnerships, as specified. The bills provisions would be repealed on January 1, 2022.

Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to allow pupils whom the district has determined would benefit from advanced scholastic or vocational work to attend community college as special part-time or full-time students, subject to parental permission. Existing law requires credit to be awarded to these pupils, as specified, authorizes a school principal to recommend a pupil for community college summer session if the pupil meets specified criteria, and prohibits the principal from recommending more than 5% of the total number of pupils from any particular grade level who completed that grade immediately before the time of recommendation for summer session attendance.

This bill would authorize the governing board of a community college district to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways partnership with the governing board of a school district with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to community college for career technical education or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness. The bill would require the partnership agreement to outline the terms of the partnership, as specified, and to establish protocols for information sharing, joint facilities use, and parental consent for high school pupils to enroll in community college courses.

The bill would authorize specified high school pupils to enroll in up to 15 units per term if those units are required for these pupils partnership programs and specified conditions are satisfied, and would authorize a community college district to exempt special part-time and full-time students taking up to a maximum of 15 units per term from specified fee requirements. The bill would prohibit a district from receiving a state allowance or apportionment for an instructional activity for which the partnering district has been, or will be, paid an allowance or apportionment under a concurrent enrollment partnership agreement. The bill would require, for each partnership agreement entered into under the bill, the affected community college district and school district to provide an annual report, containing specified data, to the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges. The bill would require the chancellor to prepare a summary report, no later than January 1, 2021, that includes an evaluation of the partnerships, as specified. The bills provisions would be repealed on January 1, 2022.

Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to allow pupils whom the district has determined would benefit from advanced scholastic or vocational work to attend community college as special part-time or full-time students, subject to parental permission. Existing law requires credit to be awarded to these pupils, as specified, authorizes a school principal to recommend a pupil for community college summer session if the pupil meets specified criteria, and prohibits the principal from recommending more than 5% of the total number of pupils from any particular grade level who completed that grade immediately before the time of recommendation for summer session attendance.

This bill would authorize the governing board of a community college district to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways partnership with the governing board of a school district with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to community college for career technical education or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness. The bill would require the partnership agreement to outline the terms of the partnership, as specified, and to establish protocols for information sharing, joint facilities use, and parental consent for high school pupils to enroll in community college courses.

The bill would authorize specified high school pupils to enroll in up to 15 units per term if those units are required for these pupils partnership programs and specified conditions are satisfied, and would authorize a community college district to exempt special part-time and full-time students taking up to a maximum of 15 units per term from specified fee requirements. The bill would prohibit a district from receiving a state allowance or apportionment for an instructional activity for which the partnering district has been, or will be, paid an allowance or apportionment under a concurrent enrollment partnership agreement. The bill would require, for each partnership agreement entered into under the bill, the affected community college district and school district to provide an annual report, containing specified data, to the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges. The bill would require the chancellor to prepare a summary report, no later than January 1, 2021, that includes an evaluation of the partnerships, as specified. The bills provisions would be repealed on January 1, 2022.

Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to allow pupils whom the district has determined would benefit from advanced scholastic or vocational work to attend community college as special part-time or full-time students, subject to parental permission. Existing law requires credit to be awarded to these pupils, as specified, authorizes a school principal to recommend a pupil for community college summer session if the pupil meets specified criteria, and prohibits the principal from recommending more than 5% of the total number of pupils from any particular grade level who completed that grade immediately before the time of recommendation for summer session attendance.

This bill would authorize the governing board of a community college district to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways partnership with the governing board of a school district with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to community college for career technical education or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness. The bill would require the partnership agreement to outline the terms of the partnership, as specified, and to establish protocols for information sharing, joint facilities use, and parental consent for high school pupils to enroll in community college courses.

The bill would authorize specified high school pupils to enroll in up to 15 units per term if those units are required for these pupils partnership programs and specified conditions are satisfied, and would authorize a community college district to exempt special part-time and full-time students taking up to a maximum of 15 units per term from specified fee requirements. The bill would prohibit a district from receiving a state allowance or apportionment for an instructional activity for which the partnering district has been, or will be, paid an allowance or apportionment under a concurrent enrollment partnership agreement. The bill would require, for each partnership agreement entered into under the bill, the affected community college district and school district to provide an annual report, containing specified data, to the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges.

Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to allow pupils whom the district has determined would benefit from advanced scholastic or vocational work to attend community college as special part-time or full-time students, subject to parental permission. Existing law requires credit to be awarded to these pupils, as specified, authorizes a school principal to recommend a pupil for community college summer session if the pupil meets specified criteria, and prohibits the principal from recommending more than 5% of the total number of pupils from any particular grade level who completed that grade immediately before the time of recommendation for summer session attendance.

This bill would authorize the governing board of a community college district to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways partnership with the governing board of a school district located within its service area with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to community college for career technical education or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness. The bill would require the partnership agreement to outline the terms of the partnership, as specified, and to establish protocols for information sharing, joint facilities use, and parental consent for high school pupils to enroll in community college courses.

The bill would authorize specified high school pupils to enroll in up to 15 units per term if those units are required for these pupils partnership programs and specified conditions are satisfied, and would authorize a community college district to exempt special part-time and full-time students taking up to a maximum of 15 units per term from specified fee requirements. The bill would prohibit a community college district from receiving a state allowance or apportionment for an instructional activity for which a school the partnering district has been, or will be, paid an allowance or apportionment under a concurrent enrollment partnership agreement. The bill would require, for each partnership agreement entered into under the bill, the affected community college district and school district to provide an annual report, containing specified data, to the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges.

Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to allow pupils whom the district has determined would benefit from advanced scholastic or vocational work to attend community college as special part-time or full-time students, subject to parental permission. Existing law requires credit to be awarded to these pupils, as specified, authorizes a school principal to recommend a pupil for community college summer session if the pupil meets specified criteria, and prohibits the principal from recommending more than 5% of the total number of pupils from any particular grade level who completed that grade immediately before the time of recommendation for summer session attendance.

This bill would authorize the governing board of a community college district to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways partnership with the governing board of a school district located within its service area with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to community college for career technical education or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness. The bill would require the partnership agreement to outline the terms of the partnership, as specified, and to establish protocols for information sharing, joint facilities use, and parental consent for high school pupils to enroll in community college courses.

The bill would authorize specified high school pupils to enroll in up to 15 units if those units are required for these pupils partnership programs and specified conditions are satisfied, and would authorize a community college district to exempt special part-time and full-time students taking up to a maximum of 15 units per term from specified fee requirements. The bill would prohibit a community college district from receiving a state allowance or apportionment for an instructional activity for which a school district has been, or will be, paid an allowance or apportionment under a concurrent enrollment partnership agreement. The bill would require, for each partnership agreement entered into under the bill, the affected community college district and school district to provide an annual report, containing specified data, to the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges.

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 288

Author:(Holden and Olsen)

As Amended Ver:September 4, 2015

Majority vote

Original Committee Reference: HIGHER ED.

SUMMARY: Authorizes the governing board of a community college district (CCD) to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnership with the governing board of a school district, in its immediate service area, with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to California Community Colleges (CCC) in order to offer or expand dual enrollment opportunities for students who may not be college bound or who are underrepresented in higher education; and, outlines the conditions that must be met prior to the adoption of the CCAP agreement.

The Senate amendments:

1. Specify the type of student that will benefit from the CCAP partnerships.

2. Require the CCAP partnership agreement to specify the total number of high school students to be served and the total full-time equivalent students (FTES) projected to be claimed by the appropriate CCD.

3. Specify that the CCC Chancellor may void any CCAP partnership agreement it determines has not complied with the intent of the requirements.

4. Clarify that the CCAP partnership agreement shall certify that any remedial courses taught by community college faculty shall only be offered to high school students who test as non-proficient in grade 10 or 11, and shall involve a collaborative effort between high school and community college faculty to deliver an innovative remediation course as an intervention in the student’s junior or senior year to ensure the student is prepared for college-level work upon graduation.

5. Require participating CCDs to certify in CCAP partnership agreements that an oversubscribed course may not be offered in the partnership.

6. Specify that the statewide number of FTES claimed as special admits shall not exceed 10% of the total number of FTES claimed statewide.

7. Require on or before January 1, 2021, the CCC Chancellor to report to the Legislature, an evaluation of the CCAP partnerships, an assessment of trends in the growth of special admits systemwide and by campus, and, based upon the data collected, as specified, recommendations for program improvements, including, but not necessarily limited to, both of the following:

   1. Any recommended changes to the statewide cap on special admit full-time equivalent students to ensure that adults are not being displaced; and,

   2. Any recommendation concerning the need for additional student assistance or academic resources to ensure the overall success of the CCAP partnerships.

8. Specify that the CCC Chancellor shall ensure that the number of FTES generated by CCAP partnerships is reported, as specified.

9. Specify that nothing in this provision is intended to affect a dual enrollment partnership agreement existing on the effective date of this measure under which an early college high school, a middle college high school, or California Career Pathways Trust existing on the effective date of this section is operated. An early college high school, middle college high school, or California Career Pathways Trust partnership agreement existing on the effective date of this measure shall not operate as a CCAP partnership unless it complies with the provisions of this measure.

10. Add sunset date of January 1, 2022.

11. Make minor clarifying and technical changes.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Authorizes the governing board of a school district, upon recommendation of the principal of a student's school of attendance, and with parental consent, to authorize a student who would benefit from advanced scholastic or vocational work to attend a community college as a special part-time or full-time student. Additionally, current law prohibited a principal from recommending, for community college summer session attendance, more than 5% of the total number of students in the same grade level and exempted from the five percent cap a student recommended by his or her principal for enrollment in a college-level summer session course if the course in which the pupil was enrolled met specified criteria. These exemptions were repealed on January 1, 2014 (Education Code (EC) Section 48800, et seq.).

2. Prohibits a pupil enrolled in a public school from being required to pay a pupil fee for participation in an educational activity; and, specifies that all of the following requirements apply to the prohibition:

   1. All supplies, materials, and equipment needed to participate in educational activities shall be provided to pupils free of charge;

   2. A fee waiver policy shall not make a pupil fee permissible;

   3. School districts and schools shall not establish a two-tier educational system by requiring a minimal educational standard and also offering a second, higher educational standard that pupils may only obtain via payment of a fee or purchase of additional supplies that the school district does not provide; and,

   4. A school district or school shall not offer course credit or privileges related to educational activities in exchange for money or donations of goods or services from a pupil or a pupil's parents or guardians, and a school district or school shall not remove course credit or privileges related to educational activities, or otherwise discriminate against a pupil, because the pupil or the pupil's parents or guardians did not or will not provide money or donations of goods or services to the school district or school (EC Section 49011).

3. Requires the California Community College Chancellor's Office (CCCCO) to report to the Department of Finance and Legislature annually on the amount of FTES claimed by each CCC district for high school pupils enrolled in non-credit, non-degree applicable, and degree applicable courses; and provides that, for purposes of receiving state apportionments, CCC districts may only include high school students within the CCC district’s report on FTES if the students are enrolled in courses that are open to the general public, as specified. Additionally, current law requires the governing board of a CCC district to assign a low enrollment priority to special part-time or full-time students in order to ensure that these students do not displace regularly admitted community college students (EC Sections 76001 and 76002).

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, unknown cost pressures to fund increased CCC apportionments. A 1% increase in special FTES, or 172 FTES, would create a cost pressure of about $806,000 using a rate of $4,684 per-FTES (Proposition 98 of 1988).

COMMENTS: Concurrent and dual enrollment background. According to New Directions for Community Colleges, no. 169, Spring 2015, the practice for offering college courses to high school students stems from local practice in many states and was initiated between CCDs and local school districts, but the practice proceeded without clear state policy guidelines, regulations, or direction; resulting in variation in local practice. Some states, such as Minnesota, as far back as the 1980s, were early adopters of state dual credit policies, whereby their state policies provided a framework for offering college courses to high school students and the students receiving both college and high school credit for some of their courses.

Concurrent enrollment provides pupils the opportunity to enroll in college courses and earn college credit while still enrolled in high school. Currently, a pupil is allowed to concurrently enroll in a CCC as a "special admit" while still attending high school, if the pupil's school district determines that the pupil would benefit from "advanced scholastic or vocational work." Special-admit students have typically been advanced pupils wanting to take more challenging coursework or pupils who come from high schools where Advanced Placement or honors courses are not widely available. Additionally, programs such as middle college high schools and early college high schools use concurrent enrollment to offer instructional programs for at-risk pupils that focus on college preparatory curricula. These programs are developed through partnerships between a school district and a CCC. During summer session at a CCC, principals are limited to recommending no more than five percent of their pupils in each grade level to enroll at a CCC during a summer session. Existing law provides certain exemptions to this process (as aforementioned in current law above). These exemptions expired on January 1, 2014.

Purpose of this bill. The author states, "Gradually more students are entering community colleges and some CSUs [California State University] assessing below college-level. Consequently, more courses are being offered on their respective campuses to prepare students for college level coursework." The author contends that, "This measure will increase the accessibility of concurrent enrollment programs in order to continue to achieve the goal of helping low achieving students integrate into a college environment, increase the likelihood a degree program will be completed, decrease the length of time to complete a degree program, and stimulate interest in higher education among high school students."

Analysis Prepared by: Jeanice Warden / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960 FN: 0002273

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 288

Author: Holden (D) and Olsen (R), et al.

Amended: 9/4/15 in Senate

Vote: 21

SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 7-0, 7/1/15

AYES: Liu, Runner, Leyva, Mendoza, Monning, Pan, Vidak

NO VOTE RECORDED: Block, Hancock

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 8/27/15

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

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0, 6/1/15 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Public schools: College and Career Access Pathways partnerships

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill, until January 1, 2022, authorizes the governing board of a community college district to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnership with the governing board of a school district within its immediate service area, as specified, to offer or expand dual enrollment opportunities for students who may not already be college bound or who are underrepresented in higher education with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to community college for career-technical education or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness, and outlines the conditions which must be met prior to the adoption of such an agreement.

Senate Floor Amendments of 9/4/15 conform assessment language to terminology applicable to the new California Common Core state standards adopted assessments and expand the allowable program objectives for students to include programs designed to award a certificate or credential.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Authorizes the governing board of a school district, upon recommendation of the principal of a pupil’s school and with parental consent, to authorize a student to concurrently enroll in a community college during any session or term to undertake one or more courses of instruction. Existing law prohibits a principal from recommending, more than 5% of the total number of students in the same grade level for community college summer session attendance.

(Education Code § 48800 et seq.)

2. Authorizes a community college district governing board to admit as a special part-time or full-time student any student eligible pursuant to EC 48800 and requires the governing board of a California Community College (CCC) district to assign these students a low enrollment priority in order to ensure that these students do not displace regularly admitted community college students. An exemption to this requirement is extended to Middle College High School (MCHS) students.

(EC § 76001)

3. Requires the California Community College Chancellor’s Office (CCCCO) to report to the Department of Finance and Legislature annually on the amount of full-time equivalent students (FTES) claimed by each CCC district for high school pupils enrolled in non-credit, non-degree applicable, degree applicable (excluding physical education), and degree applicable physical education courses; and provides that, for purposes of receiving state apportionments, CCC districts may only include high school students within the CCC district’s report on FTES if the students are enrolled in courses that are open to the general public, as specified. Additionally, current law requires the governing board of a California Community College (CCC) district to assign a low enrollment priority to special part-time or full-time students in order to ensure that these students do not displace regularly admitted community college students. (EC § 76001 and § 76002)

4. Restricts the proportion of a community college physical education class that may be comprised of special part-time or full-time students to 10% and caps the amount of state apportionment that may be claimed for these students at no more than 5% of the district’s total reported full-time equivalent enrollment of special part-time and full-time students. (EC § 76002)

This bill authorizes the governing board of a community college district to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnership with the governing board of a school district within its immediate service area, as specified, to offer or expand dual enrollment opportunities for students who may not already be college bound or who are underrepresented in higher education, with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to community college for career technical education or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness, and outlines the conditions which must be met prior to the adoption of such an agreement. Specifically, this bill:

1. Authorizes the governing board of a community college district to enter into a CCAP partnership with the governing board of a school district that is governed by a CCAP agreement approved by the governing boards of both districts.

2. Requires, as a condition of and prior to adopting a CCAP partnership agreement, that both districts present and take public comment on the proposed agreement at public meetings of their respective boards, first as an informational item, and then, at a subsequent meeting, approve or disapprove the proposed agreement.

3. Authorizes the Chancellor to void any partnership agreement it determines has not complied with the intent of the requirements of the bill.

4. Authorizes a participating community college district to:

1. Assign priority enrollment and registration to high school students enrolling in community college courses required for the partnership program equivalent to that which exists for Middle College High School participants under current law.

2. Limit enrollment in a course solely to eligible high school students if the course is offered at a high school campus during the regular school day pursuant to a CCAP agreement.

3. Allow special part-time students to enroll in up to a maximum of 15 units per term if the units constitute no more than 4 community classes and are part of a CCAP academic program designed to award students both a high school diploma and an associate’s degree, certificate or credential.

5. Outlines various requirements and authorities for districts that adopt a CCAP.

1. Requires the following in regards to the agreement:

1. An outline of the terms of the partnership, to include, but not be limited to, the total number of high school students to be served and the total number of full-time equivalent students projected to be claimed by the community college district for those students, the scope, nature, and schedule of courses offered, and the criteria to assess the ability of pupils to benefit from those courses, and requires the agreement to establish protocols for information sharing, joint facilities use, and parental consent for pupils.

2. Identification of a point of contact for the participating school and community college districts.

3. Filing of the agreement with the Office of the Chancellor of the California Community College (CCC) and the California Department of Education prior to the start of the partnership.

2. Establishes the following prohibitions:

1. Prohibits a community college district from entering into a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnership with a school district within the service area of another community college district, unless an agreement exists or is established between the community college districts authorizing the partnership.

2. Prohibits a community college district from providing physical education course opportunities to high school pupils, or any other course opportunities that do not assist in the attainment of the goals of a CCPA, as specified.

3. Prohibits any high school pupil from being assessed any course-related fees, as specified, for a community college course offered through a CCPA and requires a community college district to exempt students enrolled in CCPA courses from student representation, non-resident, transcript, apprentice course, per unit, and child care fees.

3. Establishes requirements relative to instructors. It requires the agreement to:

1. Certify that any community college instructor teaching a course on a high school campus has not been convicted of any sex offenses or any controlled substance offenses, as specified.

2. Certify that no community college instructor or qualified high school teacher has been displaced or terminated as the result of the same course being offered by their counterpart at a partnering high school or community college campus.

3. Certify that:

1. Community college courses offered for college credit at the high school do not reduce access to the same course offered at the partnering community college campus.

2. A community college course that is oversubscribed or has a waiting list is not offered in the partnership.

3. Participation in a partnership is consistent with the core mission of the community colleges and that participating pupils will not lead to displacement of otherwise eligible adults in the community college.

4. Certify that both the CCC and school district comply with local bargaining agreements and all state/federal reporting requirements regarding the qualifications of the instructors teaching partnership courses for high school credit.

5. Specify which district will be the employer of record for purposes of assignment monitoring and reporting to the county office of education, and will assume reporting responsibility pursuant to federal teacher quality mandates.

6. Certify that any remedial course taught by community college faculty at the high school campus will only be offered to students who do not meet their grade level standard in math, English, or both, on a 10th or 11th grade interim assessment, as determined by the school district, and requires that these courses involve a collaborative effort between faculty and teachers to deliver innovative remediation as an intervention to ensure students are prepared for college-level work upon graduation.

4. Establishes the following funding provisions:

1. Requires that, for purposes of allowance and apportionments of the State School Fund, a community college district conducting a closed course on a high school campus be credited with additional units of full-time equivalent students (FTES) attributable to the attendance of eligible high school pupils.

2. Prohibits a district participating in a partnership from receiving a state allowance or apportionment for an instructional activity for which the partnering district has been, or shall be, paid an allowance or apportionment.

3. Provides that attendance of a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) high school student at a community college as a special part-time or full-time student is authorized attendance for which the community college is credited or reimbursed under existing statutory authority, provided that no school district has received reimbursement for the same instructional activity.

6. Requires for each CCAP partnership agreement entered into, that the affected school district and community college district annually report as specified to the California Community College (CCC) Chancellor's Office, and to the Legislature, the Department of Finance, and the Superintendent of Public Instruction and requires that these reports include:

1. An evaluation of the CCAP partnerships and recommendations regarding program improvements, including the need for additional student assistance or academic resources to ensure the CCAP partnerships’ overall success.

2. Total number of students enrolled at each schoolsite (aggregated by gender and ethnicity and in compliance with state and federal privacy laws) the total number of CCC courses and course completions, as well as percentage of course completions by category, type, and schoolsite, and the total number of full-time equivalent students (FTES) generated by participants.

7. Requires the Chancellor to:

1. Prepare a summary report by January 1, 2021that includes an evaluation of the partnerships and an assessment of trends in the growth of special admits systemwide and by campus, and to make recommendations for program improvements, including changes to the statewide cap to ensure adults are not being displaced and changes to ensure the overall success of the partnerships.

2. Ensure that the number of full-time equivalent students generated by the partnerships is reported.

8. Provides that violation of these provisions by a community college district makes the district subject to the imposition of restrictions on interdistrict attendance and a penalty of retention of up to 5% of its appropriation under community college apportionment provisions.

9. Caps the total number of FTES for special admits at 10 percent of total FTES statewide.

10. Clarifies that these provisions do not affect existing dual enrollment partnerships , but prohibits these from operating as a CCAP Partnership unless they comply with the bill’s provisions

11. Sunsets the CCAP Partnership authority on January 1, 2022.

Comments

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, the overall goal of this bill is to increase the accessibility of concurrent enrollment programs to a broader range of students, including lower achieving students in order to integrate them into a college environment, reduce the need for college remediation in math and English, increase the likelihood a degree program will be completed, decrease the length of time to complete a degree program, and stimulate interest in higher education among high school students.

2. Related History. In December 2002, the Orange County Register ran the first in a series of highly critical articles regarding concurrent enrollment practices in the community colleges. The articles specifically focused on high school physical education (PE) classes and various suspected abuses.

These anecdotal allegations resulted in a Chancellor’s Office investigation which revealed that full-time equivalent students (FTES) generated by concurrent enrollment in both credit and noncredit courses grew from approximately 16,000 in 1992-93 to over 52,000 in 2000-01, outpacing the overall enrollment growth of the community college system. While concurrent enrollment included courses in a variety of curricular areas, there had been significant growth in concurrent enrollment in PE courses. The proportion of FTES for concurrent enrollment in PE courses was approximately 15% in 1992-93, but these courses comprised 34% of FTES for concurrent enrollment in 2000-01, the equivalent of 1.7% of all the FTES generated by the community colleges as a system. The expansion of concurrent enrollment in PE courses was more pronounced in about one-fifth (20%) of the system’s 72 districts and was especially evident with respect to PE programs. By 2001-02, six districts within the system produced 53% of the PE concurrent enrollment FTES generated by the entire system for that year. These districts included Los Angeles, Butte, North Orange, Contra Costa, Santa Clarita, and Mt. San Antonio.

As a result, SB 338 (Scott, Chapter 786, Statutes of 2003) was enacted to specify the conditions whereby concurrent enrollment of pupils between a school and community college district is permitted, establish restrictions on the amount of FTES that could be claimed for PE courses, and require annual reporting by the Chancellor of the amount of FTES claimed by each district for special full-time and special part-time students overall and for PE courses specifically.

.

3. Existing concurrent enrollment options. Community college districts have several statutorily authorized means by which apportionment can be claimed for minors enrolled by the district. These include:

1. Special part-time full time students. Current law authorizes a school district governing board to recommend students who would benefit from advanced scholastic or vocational work for attendance at a community college upon recommendation of the principal, and limits the number of students who can be recommended for summer session enrollments to 5% of the students in each grade. Community colleges are authorized to claim FTES reimbursement for these students only if the course is open and advertised to the general public. The proportion of a community college physical education (PE) class that may be comprised of special part-time or full-time students cannot exceed 10% and apportionment for these students cannot exceed 5% of the district’s total reported full-time equivalent students (FTES) for special part-time and full-time students. Students are limited to enrolling in a maximum of 11 units per semester, and must be assigned low enrollment priority by the college to avoid displacement of adults.

2. Early College High Schools (ECHS) and Middle College High Schools (MCHS). ECHS are designed for young people who are underrepresented in postsecondary education, including students who have not had access to the academic preparation needed to meet college readiness standards, students for whom the cost of college is prohibitive, students of color, first generation college-goers, and English language learners. MCHS is a collaborative program that enables high-potential, "at-risk" students to obtain a high school education while concurrently receiving direct access to college courses and services. High school students attend classes at a community college and earn credit toward a high school diploma while having the opportunity to concurrently take college courses and to receive more intensive counseling and administrative attention. According to Job for the Future, which launched ECHS in 2002, there are currently 40 ECHS in California, of which 92% are partnered with a community college. According to the Chancellor’s Office 9 community colleges offer recognized middle college programs. These programs are subject to the same conditions that exist for special admit students, with the exception that MCHS students are exempt from the low enrollment priority provisions for classes necessary for completion of their programs.

3. College Promise Partnership Act. SB 650 (Lowenthal, Chapter 633, Statutes of 2011) authorized a partnership between the Long Beach community college and school district to provide a seamless bridge to college for students who were not already college bound and to reduce the time needed for advanced students to complete programs. These students are exempted from the requirements applicable to special admit students that they must be recommended by the school principal. The community college is eligible to receive FTES for these students but is prohibited from receiving apportionment for instructional activity for which the school district received apportionment. The community college is required to provide for an independent evaluation, as specified, to be presented to the Chancellor and the Legislature by December 30, 2016. The authority for this partnership sunsets on January 1, 2018.

This bill would create yet another category of special admit options, the College and Career Access Pathways Act. According to the sponsor, this bill is intended to authorize a model more like the Long Beach Promise that offers dual enrollment as a pathway, rather than a series of disconnected individual courses, and, unlike ECHS and MCHS, provides greater flexibility in the delivery of courses at the high school campus. Unlike existing concurrent enrollment options, this bill would authorize community colleges to offer courses that are closed to the general public if offered on a high school campus, to grant special admit students higher enrollment priority than currently possible, and to exceed the current 11 unit cap per semester if the student is receiving both a high school diploma and an associate’s degree.

4. Why expand dual enrollment options? According to a February 2014 report by Education Commission of the States (ECS), the number of U. S. public high schools offering concurrent enrollment programs is growing, with 82% providing such opportunities in 2011-12. Academic research and state experience highlight the benefits of concurrent enrollment programs for improving college going rates, particularly for minority and/or low-income students. Additionally, ECS finds that with the possible exception of the state of Massachusetts, minority and/or low-income students tend to be underrepresented in statewide concurrent enrollment programs.

Similarly, in a 2012 report on its Concurrent Courses Initiative, the Irvine Foundation found that participants in dual enrollment programs that focused on underrepresented students had better academic outcomes relative to comparison students in the same districts. They were:\

1. More likely to graduate from high school.

2. More likely to transition to a four-year college (rather than a two-year college).

3. Less likely to take basic skills courses in college.

4. More likely to persist in postsecondary education.

5. Accumulating more college credits than comparison students.

The stated intent of this bill is to provide dual enrollment to a broader range of students, including lower achieving students, and to reduce remediation, increase degree completion, decrease time to degree, and stimulate interest in higher education among high school students.

5. What proportion is reasonable? The chart below summarizes the trends around special admits in relation to total full-time equivalent students for the community colleges for the last decade.

This bill caps the statewide full-time equivalent students (FTES) which may be claimed for special admits at 10% of total FTES, in order to allow for the growth of these programs, yet ensure that the vast majority of community college funding continues to be used for its core mission of serving adults.

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

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, the bill results in unknown cost pressures to fund increased California Community Colleges apportionments. A one percent increase in special full-time equivalent students (FTES), or 172 FTES, would create a cost pressure of about $806,000 using a rate of $4,684 per-FTES.

SUPPORT: (Verified 9/4/15)

Los Angeles County Office of Education

Riverside County Superintendent of Schools

OPPOSITION: (Verified 9/2/15)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0, 6/1/15

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

Prepared by: Kathleen Chavira / ED. / (916) 651-4105

9/8/15 17:24:00

**** END ****

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 288

Author: Holden (D) and Olsen (R)

Amended: 9/1/15 in Senate

Vote: 21

SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 7-0, 7/1/15

AYES: Liu, Runner, Leyva, Mendoza, Monning, Pan, Vidak

NO VOTE RECORDED: Block, Hancock

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 8/27/15

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

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0, 6/1/15 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Public schools: College and Career Access Pathways partnerships

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill, until January 1, 2022, authorizes the governing board of a community college district to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnership with the governing board of a school district within its immediate service area, as specified, to offer or expand dual enrollment opportunities for students who may not already be college bound or who are underrepresented in higher education with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to community college for career-technical education or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness, and outlines the conditions which must be met prior to the adoption of such an agreement.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Authorizes the governing board of a school district, upon recommendation of the principal of a pupil’s school and with parental consent, to authorize a student to concurrently enroll in a community college during any session or term to undertake one or more courses of instruction. Existing law prohibits a principal from recommending, more than 5% of the total number of students in the same grade level for community college summer session attendance.

(Education Code § 48800 et seq.)

2. Authorizes a community college district governing board to admit as a special part-time or full-time student any student eligible pursuant to EC 48800 and requires the governing board of a California Community College (CCC) district to assign these students a low enrollment priority in order to ensure that these students do not displace regularly admitted community college students. An exemption to this requirement is extended to Middle College High School (MCHS) students.

(EC § 76001)

3. Requires the California Community College Chancellor’s Office (CCCCO) to report to the Department of Finance and Legislature annually on the amount of full-time equivalent students (FTES) claimed by each CCC district for high school pupils enrolled in non-credit, non-degree applicable, degree applicable (excluding physical education), and degree applicable physical education courses; and provides that, for purposes of receiving state apportionments, CCC districts may only include high school students within the CCC district’s report on FTES if the students are enrolled in courses that are open to the general public, as specified. Additionally, current law requires the governing board of a California Community College (CCC) district to assign a low enrollment priority to special part-time or full-time students in order to ensure that these students do not displace regularly admitted community college students. (EC § 76001 and § 76002)

4. Restricts the proportion of a community college physical education class that may be comprised of special part-time or full-time students to 10% and caps the amount of state apportionment that may be claimed for these students at no more than 5% of the district’s total reported full-time equivalent enrollment of special part-time and full-time students. (EC § 76002)

This bill authorizes the governing board of a community college district to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnership with the governing board of a school district within its immediate service area, as specified, to offer or expand dual enrollment opportunities for students who may not already be college bound or who are underrepresented in higher education, with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to community college for career technical education or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness, and outlines the conditions which must be met prior to the adoption of such an agreement. Specifically, this bill:

1. Authorizes the governing board of a community college district to enter into a CCAP partnership with the governing board of a school district that is governed by a CCAP agreement approved by the governing boards of both districts.

2. Requires, as a condition of and prior to adopting a CCAP partnership agreement, that both districts present and take public comment on the proposed agreement at public meetings of their respective boards, first as an informational item, and then, at a subsequent meeting, approve or disapprove the proposed agreement.

3. Authorizes the Chancellor to void any partnership agreement it determines has not complied with the intent of the requirements of the bill.

4. Authorizes a participating community college district to:

1. Assign priority enrollment and registration to high school students enrolling in community college courses required for the partnership program equivalent to that which exists for Middle College High School participants under current law.

2. Limit enrollment in a course solely to eligible high school students if the course is offered at a high school campus during the regular school day pursuant to a CCAP agreement.

3. Allow special part-time students to enroll in up to a maximum of 15 units per term if the units constitute no more than 4 community classes and are part of a CCAP academic program designed to award students both a high school diploma and an associate’s degree.

5. Outlines various requirements and authorities for districts that adopt a CCAP.

1. Requires the following in regards to the agreement:

1. An outline of the terms of the partnership, to include, but not be limited to, the total number of high school students to be served and the total number of full-time equivalent students projected to be claimed by the community college district for those students, the scope, nature, and schedule of courses offered, and the criteria to assess the ability of pupils to benefit from those courses, and requires the agreement to establish protocols for information sharing, joint facilities use, and parental consent for pupils.

2. Identification of a point of contact for the participating school and community college districts.

3. Filing of the agreement with the Office of the Chancellor of the California Community College (CCC) and the California Department of Education prior to the start of the partnership.

2. Establishes the following prohibitions:

1. Prohibits a community college district from entering into a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnership with a school district within the service area of another community college district, unless an agreement exists or is established between the community college districts authorizing the partnership.

2. Prohibits a community college district from providing physical education course opportunities to high school pupils, or any other course opportunities that do not assist in the attainment of the goals of a CCPA, as specified.

3. Prohibits any high school pupil from being assessed any course-related fees, as specified, for a community college course offered through a CCPA and requires a community college district to exempt students enrolled in CCPA courses from student representation, non-resident, transcript, apprentice course, per unit, and child care fees.

3. Establishes requirements relative to instructors. It requires the agreement to:

1. Certify that any community college instructor teaching a course on a high school campus has not been convicted of any sex offenses or any controlled substance offenses, as specified.

2. Certify that no community college instructor or qualified high school teacher has been displaced or terminated as the result of the same course being offered by their counterpart at a partnering high school or community college campus.

3. Certify that:

1. Community college courses offered for college credit at the high school do not reduce access to the same course offered at the partnering community college campus.

2. A community college course that is oversubscribed or has a waiting list is not offered in the partnership.

3. Participation in a partnership is consistent with the core mission of the community colleges and that participating pupils will not lead to displacement of otherwise eligible adults in the community college.

4. Certify that both the CCC and school district comply with local bargaining agreements and all state/federal reporting requirements regarding the qualifications of the instructors teaching partnership courses for high school credit.

5. Specify which district will be the employer of record for purposes of assignment monitoring and reporting to the county office of education, and will assume reporting responsibility pursuant to federal teacher quality mandates.

6. Certify that any remedial course taught by community college faculty at the high school campus will only be offered to students testing as nonproficient in math, English, or both, on a 10th or 11th grade formative assessment, as determined by the school district, and requires that these courses involve a collaborative effort between faculty and teachers to deliver innovative remediation as an intervention to ensure students are prepared for college-level work upon graduation.

4. Establishes the following funding provisions:

1. Requires that, for purposes of allowance and apportionments of the State School Fund, a community college district conducting a closed course on a high school campus be credited with additional units of full-time equivalent students (FTES) attributable to the attendance of eligible high school pupils.

2. Prohibits a district participating in a partnership from receiving a state allowance or apportionment for an instructional activity for which the partnering district has been, or shall be, paid an allowance or apportionment.

3. Provides that attendance of a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) high school student at a community college as a special part-time or full-time student is authorized attendance for which the community college is credited or reimbursed under existing statutory authority, provided that no school district has received reimbursement for the same instructional activity.

6. Requires for each CCAP partnership agreement entered into, that the affected school district and community college district annually report as specified to the California Community College (CCC) Chancellor's Office, and to the Legislature, the Department of Finance, and the Superintendent of Public Instruction and requires that these reports include:

1. An evaluation of the CCAP partnerships and recommendations regarding program improvements, including the need for additional student assistance or academic resources to ensure the CCAP partnerships’ overall success.

2. Total number of students enrolled at each schoolsite (aggregated by gender and ethnicity and in compliance with state and federal privacy laws) the total number of CCC courses and course completions, as well as percentage of course completions by category, type, and schoolsite, and the total number of full-time equivalent students (FTES) generated by participants.

7. Requires the Chancellor to:

1. Prepare a summary report by January 1, 2021that includes an evaluation of the partnerships and an assessment of trends in the growth of special admits systemwide and by campus, and to make recommendations for program improvements, including changes to the statewide cap to ensure adults are not being displaced and changes to ensure the overall success of the partnerships.

2. Ensure that the number of full-time equivalent students generated by the partnerships is reported.

8. Provides that violation of these provisions by a community college district makes the district subject to the imposition of restrictions on interdistrict attendance and a penalty of retention of up to 5% of its appropriation under community college apportionment provisions.

9. Caps the total number of FTES for special admits at 10 percent of total FTES statewide.

10. Clarifies that these provisions do not affect existing dual enrollment partnerships , but prohibits these from operating as a CCAP Partnership unless they comply with the bill’s provisions

11. Sunsets the CCAP Partnership authority on January 1, 2022.

Comments

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, the overall goal of this bill is to increase the accessibility of concurrent enrollment programs to a broader range of students, including lower achieving students in order to integrate them into a college environment, reduce the need for college remediation in math and English, increase the likelihood a degree program will be completed, decrease the length of time to complete a degree program, and stimulate interest in higher education among high school students.

2. Related History. In December 2002, the Orange County Register ran the first in a series of highly critical articles regarding concurrent enrollment practices in the community colleges. The articles specifically focused on high school physical education (PE) classes and various suspected abuses.

These anecdotal allegations resulted in a Chancellor’s Office investigation which revealed that full-time equivalent students (FTES) generated by concurrent enrollment in both credit and noncredit courses grew from approximately 16,000 in 1992-93 to over 52,000 in 2000-01, outpacing the overall enrollment growth of the community college system. While concurrent enrollment included courses in a variety of curricular areas, there had been significant growth in concurrent enrollment in PE courses. The proportion of FTES for concurrent enrollment in PE courses was approximately 15% in 1992-93, but these courses comprised 34% of FTES for concurrent enrollment in 2000-01, the equivalent of 1.7% of all the FTES generated by the community colleges as a system. The expansion of concurrent enrollment in PE courses was more pronounced in about one-fifth (20%) of the system’s 72 districts and was especially evident with respect to PE programs. By 2001-02, six districts within the system produced 53% of the PE concurrent enrollment FTES generated by the entire system for that year. These districts included Los Angeles, Butte, North Orange, Contra Costa, Santa Clarita, and Mt. San Antonio.

As a result, SB 338 (Scott, Chapter 786, Statutes of 2003) was enacted to specify the conditions whereby concurrent enrollment of pupils between a school and community college district is permitted, establish restrictions on the amount of FTES that could be claimed for PE courses, and require annual reporting by the Chancellor of the amount of FTES claimed by each district for special full-time and special part-time students overall and for PE courses specifically.

.

3. Existing concurrent enrollment options. Community college districts have several statutorily authorized means by which apportionment can be claimed for minors enrolled by the district. These include:

1. Special part-time full time students. Current law authorizes a school district governing board to recommend students who would benefit from advanced scholastic or vocational work for attendance at a community college upon recommendation of the principal, and limits the number of students who can be recommended for summer session enrollments to 5% of the students in each grade. Community colleges are authorized to claim FTES reimbursement for these students only if the course is open and advertised to the general public. The proportion of a community college physical education (PE) class that may be comprised of special part-time or full-time students cannot exceed 10% and apportionment for these students cannot exceed 5% of the district’s total reported full-time equivalent students (FTES) for special part-time and full-time students. Students are limited to enrolling in a maximum of 11 units per semester, and must be assigned low enrollment priority by the college to avoid displacement of adults.

2. Early College High Schools (ECHS) and Middle College High Schools (MCHS). ECHS are designed for young people who are underrepresented in postsecondary education, including students who have not had access to the academic preparation needed to meet college readiness standards, students for whom the cost of college is prohibitive, students of color, first generation college-goers, and English language learners. MCHS is a collaborative program that enables high-potential, "at-risk" students to obtain a high school education while concurrently receiving direct access to college courses and services. High school students attend classes at a community college and earn credit toward a high school diploma while having the opportunity to concurrently take college courses and to receive more intensive counseling and administrative attention. According to Job for the Future, which launched ECHS in 2002, there are currently 40 ECHS in California, of which 92% are partnered with a community college. According to the Chancellor’s Office 9 community colleges offer recognized middle college programs. These programs are subject to the same conditions that exist for special admit students, with the exception that MCHS students are exempt from the low enrollment priority provisions for classes necessary for completion of their programs.

3. College Promise Partnership Act. SB 650 (Lowenthal, Chapter 633, Statutes of 2011) authorized a partnership between the Long Beach community college and school district to provide a seamless bridge to college for students who were not already college bound and to reduce the time needed for advanced students to complete programs. These students are exempted from the requirements applicable to special admit students that they must be recommended by the school principal. The community college is eligible to receive FTES for these students but is prohibited from receiving apportionment for instructional activity for which the school district received apportionment. The community college is required to provide for an independent evaluation, as specified, to be presented to the Chancellor and the Legislature by December 30, 2016. The authority for this partnership sunsets on January 1, 2018.

This bill would create yet another category of special admit options, the College and Career Access Pathways Act. According to the sponsor, this bill is intended to authorize a model more like the Long Beach Promise that offers dual enrollment as a pathway, rather than a series of disconnected individual courses, and, unlike ECHS and MCHS, provides greater flexibility in the delivery of courses at the high school campus. Unlike existing concurrent enrollment options, this bill would authorize community colleges to offer courses that are closed to the general public if offered on a high school campus, to grant special admit students higher enrollment priority than currently possible, and to exceed the current 11 unit cap per semester if the student is receiving both a high school diploma and an associate’s degree.

4. Why expand dual enrollment options? According to a February 2014 report by Education Commission of the States (ECS), the number of U. S. public high schools offering concurrent enrollment programs is growing, with 82% providing such opportunities in 2011-12. Academic research and state experience highlight the benefits of concurrent enrollment programs for improving college going rates, particularly for minority and/or low-income students. Additionally, ECS finds that with the possible exception of the state of Massachusetts, minority and/or low-income students tend to be underrepresented in statewide concurrent enrollment programs.

Similarly, in a 2012 report on its Concurrent Courses Initiative, the Irvine Foundation found that participants in dual enrollment programs that focused on underrepresented students had better academic outcomes relative to comparison students in the same districts. They were:\

1. More likely to graduate from high school.

2. More likely to transition to a four-year college (rather than a two-year college).

3. Less likely to take basic skills courses in college.

4. More likely to persist in postsecondary education.

5. Accumulating more college credits than comparison students.

The stated intent of this bill is to provide dual enrollment to a broader range of students, including lower achieving students, and to reduce remediation, increase degree completion, decrease time to degree, and stimulate interest in higher education among high school students.

5. What proportion is reasonable? The chart below summarizes the trends around special admits in relation to total full-time equivalent students for the community colleges for the last decade.

This bill caps the statewide full-time equivalent students (FTES) which may be claimed for special admits at 10% of total FTES, in order to allow for the growth of these programs, yet ensure that the vast majority of community college funding continues to be used for its core mission of serving adults.

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

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, the bill results in unknown cost pressures to fund increased California Community Colleges apportionments. A one percent increase in special full-time equivalent students (FTES), or 172 FTES, would create a cost pressure of about $806,000 using a rate of $4,684 per-FTES.

SUPPORT: (Verified 9/2/15)

Los Angeles County Office of Education

Riverside County Superintendent of Schools

OPPOSITION: (Verified 9/2/15)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0, 6/1/15

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

Prepared by: Kathleen Chavira / ED. / (916) 651-4105

9/2/15 14:05:37

**** END ****

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 288

Author: Holden (D) and Olsen (R)

Amended: 9/1/15 in Senate

Vote: 21

SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 7-0, 7/1/15

AYES: Liu, Runner, Leyva, Mendoza, Monning, Pan, Vidak

NO VOTE RECORDED: Block, Hancock

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 8/27/15

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

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0, 6/1/15 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Public schools: College and Career Access Pathways partnerships

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill, until January 1, 2022, authorizes the governing board of a community college district to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnership with the governing board of a school district within its immediate service area, as specified, to offer or expand dual enrollment opportunities for students who may not already be college bound or who are underrepresented in higher education with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to community college for career-technical education or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness, and outlines the conditions which must be met prior to the adoption of such an agreement.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Authorizes the governing board of a school district, upon recommendation of the principal of a pupil’s school and with parental consent, to authorize a student to concurrently enroll in a community college during any session or term to undertake one or more courses of instruction. Existing law prohibits a principal from recommending, more than 5% of the total number of students in the same grade level for community college summer session attendance.

(Education Code § 48800 et seq.)

2. Authorizes a community college district governing board to admit as a special part-time or full-time student any student eligible pursuant to EC 48800 and requires the governing board of a California Community College (CCC) district to assign these students a low enrollment priority in order to ensure that these students do not displace regularly admitted community college students. An exemption to this requirement is extended to Middle College High School (MCHS) students.

(EC § 76001)

3. Requires the California Community College Chancellor’s Office (CCCCO) to report to the Department of Finance and Legislature annually on the amount of full-time equivalent students (FTES) claimed by each CCC district for high school pupils enrolled in non-credit, non-degree applicable, degree applicable (excluding physical education), and degree applicable physical education courses; and provides that, for purposes of receiving state apportionments, CCC districts may only include high school students within the CCC district’s report on FTES if the students are enrolled in courses that are open to the general public, as specified. Additionally, current law requires the governing board of a California Community College (CCC) district to assign a low enrollment priority to special part-time or full-time students in order to ensure that these students do not displace regularly admitted community college students. (EC § 76001 and § 76002)

4. Restricts the proportion of a community college physical education class that may be comprised of special part-time or full-time students to 10% and caps the amount of state apportionment that may be claimed for these students at no more than 5% of the district’s total reported full-time equivalent enrollment of special part-time and full-time students. (EC § 76002)

This bill authorizes the governing board of a community college district to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnership with the governing board of a school district within its immediate service area, as specified, to offer or expand dual enrollment opportunities for students who may not already be college bound or who are underrepresented in higher education, with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to community college for career technical education or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness, and outlines the conditions which must be met prior to the adoption of such an agreement. Specifically, this bill:

1. Authorizes the governing board of a community college district to enter into a CCAP partnership with the governing board of a school district that is governed by a CCAP agreement approved by the governing boards of both districts.

2. Requires, as a condition of and prior to adopting a CCAP partnership agreement, that both districts present and take public comment on the proposed agreement at public meetings of their respective boards, first as an informational item, and then, at a subsequent meeting, approve or disapprove the proposed agreement.

3. Authorizes the Chancellor to void any partnership agreement it determines has not complied with the intent of the requirements of the bill.

4. Authorizes a participating community college district to:

1. Assign priority enrollment and registration to high school students enrolling in community college courses required for the partnership program equivalent to that which exists for Middle College High School participants under current law.

2. Limit enrollment in a course solely to eligible high school students if the course is offered at a high school campus during the regular school day pursuant to a CCAP agreement.

3. Allow special part-time students to enroll in up to a maximum of 15 units per term if the units constitute no more than 4 community classes and are part of a CCAP academic program designed to award students both a high school diploma and an associate’s degree.

5. Outlines various requirements and authorities for districts that adopt a CCAP.

1. Requires the following in regards to the agreement:

1. An outline of the terms of the partnership, to include, but not be limited to, the total number of high school students to be served and the total number of full-time equivalent students projected to be claimed by the community college district for those students, the scope, nature, and schedule of courses offered, and the criteria to assess the ability of pupils to benefit from those courses, and requires the agreement to establish protocols for information sharing, joint facilities use, and parental consent for pupils.

2. Identification of a point of contact for the participating school and community college districts.

3. Filing of the agreement with the Office of the Chancellor of the California Community College (CCC) and the California Department of Education prior to the start of the partnership.

2. Establishes the following prohibitions:

1. Prohibits a community college district from entering into a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnership with a school district within the service area of another community college district, unless an agreement exists or is established between the community college districts authorizing the partnership.

2. Prohibits a community college district from providing physical education course opportunities to high school pupils, or any other course opportunities that do not assist in the attainment of the goals of a CCPA, as specified.

3. Prohibits any high school pupil from being assessed any course-related fees, as specified, for a community college course offered through a CCPA and requires a community college district to exempt students enrolled in CCPA courses from student representation, non-resident, transcript, apprentice course, per unit, and child care fees.

3. Establishes requirements relative to instructors. It requires the agreement to:

1. Certify that any community college instructor teaching a course on a high school campus has not been convicted of any sex offenses or any controlled substance offenses, as specified.

2. Certify that no community college instructor or qualified high school teacher has been displaced or terminated as the result of the same course being offered by their counterpart at a partnering high school or community college campus.

3. Certify that:

1. Community college courses offered for college credit at the high school do not reduce access to the same course offered at the partnering community college campus.

2. A community college course that is oversubscribed or has a waiting list is not offered in the partnership.

3. Participation in a partnership is consistent with the core mission of the community colleges and that participating pupils will not lead to displacement of otherwise eligible adults in the community college.

4. Certify that both the CCC and school district comply with local bargaining agreements and all state/federal reporting requirements regarding the qualifications of the instructors teaching partnership courses for high school credit.

5. Specify which district will be the employer of record for purposes of assignment monitoring and reporting to the county office of education, and will assume reporting responsibility pursuant to federal teacher quality mandates.

6. Certify that any remedial course taught by community college faculty at the high school campus will only be offered to students testing as nonproficient in math, English, or both, on a 10th or 11th grade formative assessment, as determined by the school district, and requires that these courses involve a collaborative effort between faculty and teachers to deliver innovative remediation as an intervention to ensure students are prepared for college-level work upon graduation.

4. Establishes the following funding provisions:

1. Requires that, for purposes of allowance and apportionments of the State School Fund, a community college district conducting a closed course on a high school campus be credited with additional units of full-time equivalent students (FTES) attributable to the attendance of eligible high school pupils.

2. Prohibits a district participating in a partnership from receiving a state allowance or apportionment for an instructional activity for which the partnering district has been, or shall be, paid an allowance or apportionment.

3. Provides that attendance of a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) high school student at a community college as a special part-time or full-time student is authorized attendance for which the community college is credited or reimbursed under existing statutory authority, provided that no school district has received reimbursement for the same instructional activity.

6. Requires for each CCAP partnership agreement entered into, that the affected school district and community college district annually report as specified to the California Community College (CCC) Chancellor's Office, and to the Legislature, the Department of Finance, and the Superintendent of Public Instruction and requires that these reports include:

1. An evaluation of the CCAP partnerships and recommendations regarding program improvements, including the need for additional student assistance or academic resources to ensure the CCAP partnerships’ overall success.

2. Total number of students enrolled at each schoolsite (aggregated by gender and ethnicity and in compliance with state and federal privacy laws) the total number of CCC courses and course completions, as well as percentage of course completions by category, type, and schoolsite, and the total number of full-time equivalent students (FTES) generated by participants.

7. Requires the Chancellor to:

1. Prepare a summary report by January 1, 2021that includes an evaluation of the partnerships and an assessment of trends in the growth of special admits systemwide and by campus, and to make recommendations for program improvements, including changes to the statewide cap to ensure adults are not being displaced and changes to ensure the overall success of the partnerships.

2. Ensure that the number of full-time equivalent students generated by the partnerships is reported.

8. Provides that violation of these provisions by a community college district makes the district subject to the imposition of restrictions on interdistrict attendance and a penalty of retention of up to 5% of its appropriation under community college apportionment provisions.

9. Caps the total number of FTES for special admits at 10 percent of total FTES statewide.

10. Clarifies that these provisions do not affect existing dual enrollment partnerships , but prohibits these from operating as a CCAP Partnership unless they comply with the bill’s provisions

11. Sunsets the CCAP Partnership authority on January 1, 2022.

Comments

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, the overall goal of this bill is to increase the accessibility of concurrent enrollment programs to a broader range of students, including lower achieving students in order to integrate them into a college environment, reduce the need for college remediation in math and English, increase the likelihood a degree program will be completed, decrease the length of time to complete a degree program, and stimulate interest in higher education among high school students.

2. Related History. In December 2002, the Orange County Register ran the first in a series of highly critical articles regarding concurrent enrollment practices in the community colleges. The articles specifically focused on high school physical education (PE) classes and various suspected abuses.

These anecdotal allegations resulted in a Chancellor’s Office investigation which revealed that full-time equivalent students (FTES) generated by concurrent enrollment in both credit and noncredit courses grew from approximately 16,000 in 1992-93 to over 52,000 in 2000-01, outpacing the overall enrollment growth of the community college system. While concurrent enrollment included courses in a variety of curricular areas, there had been significant growth in concurrent enrollment in PE courses. The proportion of FTES for concurrent enrollment in PE courses was approximately 15% in 1992-93, but these courses comprised 34% of FTES for concurrent enrollment in 2000-01, the equivalent of 1.7% of all the FTES generated by the community colleges as a system. The expansion of concurrent enrollment in PE courses was more pronounced in about one-fifth (20%) of the system’s 72 districts and was especially evident with respect to PE programs. By 2001-02, six districts within the system produced 53% of the PE concurrent enrollment FTES generated by the entire system for that year. These districts included Los Angeles, Butte, North Orange, Contra Costa, Santa Clarita, and Mt. San Antonio.

As a result, SB 338 (Scott, Chapter 786, Statutes of 2003) was enacted to specify the conditions whereby concurrent enrollment of pupils between a school and community college district is permitted, establish restrictions on the amount of FTES that could be claimed for PE courses, and require annual reporting by the Chancellor of the amount of FTES claimed by each district for special full-time and special part-time students overall and for PE courses specifically.

.

3. Existing concurrent enrollment options. Community college districts have several statutorily authorized means by which apportionment can be claimed for minors enrolled by the district. These include:

1. Special part-time full time students. Current law authorizes a school district governing board to recommend students who would benefit from advanced scholastic or vocational work for attendance at a community college upon recommendation of the principal, and limits the number of students who can be recommended for summer session enrollments to 5% of the students in each grade. Community colleges are authorized to claim FTES reimbursement for these students only if the course is open and advertised to the general public. The proportion of a community college physical education (PE) class that may be comprised of special part-time or full-time students cannot exceed 10% and apportionment for these students cannot exceed 5% of the district’s total reported full-time equivalent students (FTES) for special part-time and full-time students. Students are limited to enrolling in a maximum of 11 units per semester, and must be assigned low enrollment priority by the college to avoid displacement of adults.

2. Early College High Schools (ECHS) and Middle College High Schools (MCHS). ECHS are designed for young people who are underrepresented in postsecondary education, including students who have not had access to the academic preparation needed to meet college readiness standards, students for whom the cost of college is prohibitive, students of color, first generation college-goers, and English language learners. MCHS is a collaborative program that enables high-potential, "at-risk" students to obtain a high school education while concurrently receiving direct access to college courses and services. High school students attend classes at a community college and earn credit toward a high school diploma while having the opportunity to concurrently take college courses and to receive more intensive counseling and administrative attention. According to Job for the Future, which launched ECHS in 2002, there are currently 40 ECHS in California, of which 92% are partnered with a community college. According to the Chancellor’s Office 9 community colleges offer recognized middle college programs. These programs are subject to the same conditions that exist for special admit students, with the exception that MCHS students are exempt from the low enrollment priority provisions for classes necessary for completion of their programs.

3. College Promise Partnership Act. SB 650 (Lowenthal, Chapter 633, Statutes of 2011) authorized a partnership between the Long Beach community college and school district to provide a seamless bridge to college for students who were not already college bound and to reduce the time needed for advanced students to complete programs. These students are exempted from the requirements applicable to special admit students that they must be recommended by the school principal. The community college is eligible to receive FTES for these students but is prohibited from receiving apportionment for instructional activity for which the school district received apportionment. The community college is required to provide for an independent evaluation, as specified, to be presented to the Chancellor and the Legislature by December 30, 2016. The authority for this partnership sunsets on January 1, 2018.

This bill would create yet another category of special admit options, the College and Career Access Pathways Act. According to the sponsor, this bill is intended to authorize a model more like the Long Beach Promise that offers dual enrollment as a pathway, rather than a series of disconnected individual courses, and, unlike ECHS and MCHS, provides greater flexibility in the delivery of courses at the high school campus. Unlike existing concurrent enrollment options, this bill would authorize community colleges to offer courses that are closed to the general public if offered on a high school campus, to grant special admit students higher enrollment priority than currently possible, and to exceed the current 11 unit cap per semester if the student is receiving both a high school diploma and an associate’s degree.

4. Why expand dual enrollment options? According to a February 2014 report by Education Commission of the States (ECS), the number of U. S. public high schools offering concurrent enrollment programs is growing, with 82% providing such opportunities in 2011-12. Academic research and state experience highlight the benefits of concurrent enrollment programs for improving college going rates, particularly for minority and/or low-income students. Additionally, ECS finds that with the possible exception of the state of Massachusetts, minority and/or low-income students tend to be underrepresented in statewide concurrent enrollment programs.

Similarly, in a 2012 report on its Concurrent Courses Initiative, the Irvine Foundation found that participants in dual enrollment programs that focused on underrepresented students had better academic outcomes relative to comparison students in the same districts. They were:\

1. More likely to graduate from high school.

2. More likely to transition to a four-year college (rather than a two-year college).

3. Less likely to take basic skills courses in college.

4. More likely to persist in postsecondary education.

5. Accumulating more college credits than comparison students.

The stated intent of this bill is to provide dual enrollment to a broader range of students, including lower achieving students, and to reduce remediation, increase degree completion, decrease time to degree, and stimulate interest in higher education among high school students.

5. What proportion is reasonable? The chart below summarizes the trends around special admits in relation to total full-time equivalent students for the community colleges for the last decade.

This bill caps the statewide full-time equivalent students (FTES) which may be claimed for special admits at 10% of total FTES, in order to allow for the growth of these programs, yet ensure that the vast majority of community college funding continues to be used for its core mission of serving adults.

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

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, the bill results in unknown cost pressures to fund increased California Community Colleges apportionments. A one percent increase in special full-time equivalent students (FTES), or 172 FTES, would create a cost pressure of about $806,000 using a rate of $4,684 per-FTES.

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/31/15)

Los Angeles County Office of Education

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/31/15)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0, 6/1/15

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

Prepared by: Kathleen Chavira / ED. / (916) 651-4105

9/1/15 20:29:53

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular Session

AB 288 (Holden) - Public schools: College and Career Access Pathways partnerships.

*********** ANALYSIS ADDENDUM – SUSPENSE FILE ***********

The following information is revised to reflect amendments

adopted by the committee on August 27, 2015

Bill Summary:

This bill authorizes the governing board of a community college district to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnership with the governing board of a school district in its immediate service area to offer or expand dual enrollment opportunities for students who may not be college bound or who are underrepresented in higher education, and outlines the conditions that must be met prior to the adoption of such an agreement.

Fiscal Impact:

• Unknown cost pressures to fund increased California Community Colleges apportionments. A one percent increase in special full-time equivalent students (FTES), or 172 FTES, would create a cost pressure of about $806,000 using a rate of $4,684 per-FTES. (Proposition 98)

Committee Amendments:

Require participating community college districts to certify in CCAP partnership agreements that a oversubscribed course may not be offered in the partnership.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular Session

AB 288 (Holden) - Public schools: College and Career Access Pathways partnerships.

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

Bill Summary:

This bill authorizes the governing board of a community college district to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnership with the governing board of a school district in its immediate service area to offer or expand dual enrollment opportunities for students who may not be college bound or who are underrepresented in higher education and outlines the conditions that must be met prior to the adoption of such an agreement.

Fiscal Impact:

• Unknown cost pressures to fund increased California Community Colleges apportionments. A one percent increase in special full-time equivalent students (FTES), or 172 FTES, would create a cost pressure of about $806,000 using a rate of $4,684 per-FTES. (Proposition 98)

Background:

Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district, upon recommendation of the principal of a student's school of attendance, and with parental consent, to authorize a student who would benefit from advanced scholastic or vocational work to attend a community college as a special part-time or full-time student.

Existing law authorizes a community college district governing board to admit as a special part-time or full-time student any student eligible pursuant to EC 48800 and requires the governing board of a California Community College (CCC) district to assign these students a low enrollment priority in order to ensure that they these students do not displace regularly admitted community college students. An exemption to this requirement is extended to Middle College High School (MCHS) students. (EC § 76001)

Existing law also requires the California Community College Chancellor's Office (CCCCO) to annually report to the Department of Finance and the Legislature the number of full-time equivalent students (FTES) claimed by each CCD for high school pupils enrolled in non-credit, non-degree applicable, degree applicable (excluding physical education), and degree applicable physical education courses. Existing law further provides that, for purposes of receiving state apportionments, CCDs may only include high school students within the CCD’s report on FTES if the students are enrolled in courses that are open to the general public, as specified. (EC §76002)

Existing law restricts the proportion of a community college physical education class that may be comprised of special part-time or full-time students to 10% and caps the amount of state apportionment that may be claimed for these students at no more than 5% of the district’s total reported full-time equivalent enrollment of special part-time and full-time students. (EC § 76002)

Proposed Law:

This bill authorizes the governing board of a community college district to enter into a CCAP partnership ith the governing board of a school district in its immediate service area to offer or expand dual enrollment opportunities for students who may not be college bound or who are underrepresented in higher education.

This bill:

1. Authorizes a participating CCD to:

   1. Assign priority enrollment and registration to high school students enrolling in community college courses required for the partnership program equivalent to that which exists for Middle College High School participants under current law.

   2. Limit enrollment in a course solely to eligible high school students if the course is offered at a high school campus during the regular school day pursuant to a CCAP agreement.

   3. Allow a participating special part-time student to enroll in up to a maximum of 15 units per term under specified circumstances.

2. Establishes the following regarding the agreement:

   1. Requires an outline of the terms of the partnership including the total number of high school students to be served and the total number of full-time equivalent students projected to be claimed by the CCD; the details of the courses that will be offered; the criteria by which students are assessed of their ability to benefit from the courses; and parental consent for high school students to participate. The partnership agreements must be filed with the Chancellor’s Office of the California Community Colleges and with the California Department of Education.

   2. Authorizes the chancellor to void any partnership agreement it determines has not complied with the intent of the requirements of this bill.

3. Establishes the following prohibitions:

   1. Providing physical education courses to high school students or any other course that does not assist in the attainment of specified goals.

   2. The agreement must exempt any high school student from being assessed any course-related fees, as specified, for a community college course offered through the partnership, and requires a CCD to exempt students enrolled in partnership courses from student representation non-resident, transcript, apprentice course per unit, and child care fees.

   3. The statewide number of full-time equivalent students claimed as special admits exceed 10 percent of the total number of full-time equivalent students claimed statewide.

4. The agreement must certify:

1. Any community college instructor teaching a course at the partnering high school campus has not displaced or resulted in the termination of an existing high school teacher teaching the same course and that a high school teacher has not displaced or resulted in the termination of an existing faculty member teaching the same course at the partnering community college campus.

2. A course offered for college credit at the high school campus does not reduce access to the same course offered at the community college campus and that students participating in the partnership will not lead to enrollment displacement of otherwise eligible adults in the community college.

3. Any remedial course taught by a community college faculty at a partnering high school be offered to only those eligible, as specified, and must involve a collaborative effort to deliver an innovative remediation course.

5. Establishes the following funding provisions:

   1. For purposes of allowance and apportionments, a CCD conducting a closed course on a high school campus must be credited with the units of full-time equivalent students attributable to the attendance of eligible high school students.

   2. Attendance of a participating high school student at a community college as a special part-time or full-time student is authorized attendance for which the community college is credited or reimbursed under existing statutory authority, provided that no school district has received reimbursement for the same instructional activity.

6. Establishes the following reporting requirements:

   1. The participating CCD and school district must report annually to the CCCCO specified information regarding the enrollment and courses of the partnership.

   2. The CCCCO is required to prepare a summary report by January 1, 2021 that includes an evaluation of the partnerships, an assessment of trends of the growth in special admits, and recommendations for program improvements, as specified.

   3. The CCC Chancellor is required to ensure that the number of full-time equivalent students generated by partnerships is included.

7. Provides that if a CCD violates these provisions, including any restriction imposed by the board of governors, it is subject to the imposition of restrictions on interdistrict attendance and a penalty of retention of up to five percent of its appropriation under community college apportionment provisions.

Related Legislation:

AB 542 (Wilk) lessens the restrictions on community college enrollment of special part-time and full-time students enrolled in middle college and early college high schools. AB 542 is substantially similar to AB 2352 (Chesbro, 2014) which failed passage in this Committee.

AB 1451 (Holden, 2014) authorized the governing board of a school district to enter into a formal concurrent enrollment partnership agreement with a CCD located within its immediate service area. This bill failed passage in this Committee.

Staff Comments:

According to the author’s office, the goal of this bill is to increase the accessibility of concurrent enrollment programs to a broader range of students, to integrate them in a college environment, reduce the need for remediation, increase the likelihood a degree program will be completed, decrease the length of time to complete the degree program, and stimulate interest in higher education.

The cost of this bill is unknown as it depends on the effects it would have on community college enrollment. Currently, concurrent enrollment programs are provided funding for a full day of instruction as long as the high school students meet the minimum day requirement of 180 minutes and are concurrently enrolled in a community college. This results in the state paying for a full day of attendance at a high school as well as state apportionments for community college enrollment. Therefore, any additional FTES that community colleges claim as a result of CCAP agreements would result in additional cost pressures to provide funding. This would likely come at the expense of another community college program. The CCC Chancellor’s Office estimates that a one percent increase special full-time equivalent students (FTES), or 172 FTES, would create a cost pressure of about $806,000 using a rate of $4,684 per-FTES.

To the extent that this bill results in more students earning college credits, students may move through a public postsecondary institution more quickly in the future, which may contribute to future cost savings from reduced time in college (which may also lead to less time receiving state-funded financial aid). However, this assumes the college credits earned through a CCAP agreement will be recognized by the postsecondary institution to which the credits are transferred and students do not take excess courses at the institution.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Senator Carol Liu, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Bill No: AB 288

Subject: Public schools: College and Career Access Pathways partnerships

SUMMARY

This bill authorizes the governing board of a community college district to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnership with the governing board of a school district within its immediate service area, as specified, to offer or expand dual enrollment opportunities with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to community college for career-technical education or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness and outlines the conditions which must be met prior to the adoption of such an agreement.

BACKGROUND

Existing law:

1. Authorizes the governing board of a school district, upon recommendation of the principal of a pupil’s school and with parental consent, to authorize a student to concurrently enroll in a community college during any session or term to undertake one or more courses of instruction. Existing law prohibits a principal from recommending, more than 5% of the total number of students in the same grade level for community college summer session attendance.

(Education Code § 48800 et seq.)

2. Authorizes a community college district governing board to admit as a special part-time or full-time student any student eligible pursuant to EC 48800 and requires the governing board of a California Community College (CCC) district to assign these students a low enrollment priority in order to ensure that these students do not displace regularly admitted community college students. An exemption to this requirement is extended to Middle College High School (MCHS) students.

(EC § 76001)

3. Requires the California Community College Chancellor’s Office (CCCCO) to report to the Department of Finance and Legislature annually on the amount of full-time equivalent students (FTES) claimed by each CCC district for high school pupils enrolled in non-credit, non-degree applicable, degree applicable (excluding physical education), and degree applicable physical education courses; and provides that, for purposes of receiving state apportionments, CCC districts may only include high school students within the CCC district’s report on FTES if the students are enrolled in courses that are open to the general public, as specified. Additionally, current law requires the governing board of a California Community College (CCC) district to assign a low enrollment priority to special part-time or full-time students in order to ensure that these students do not displace regularly admitted community college students. (EC § 76001 and § 76002)

4. Restricts the proportion of a community college physical education class that may be comprised of special part-time or full-time students to 10% and caps the amount of state apportionment that may be claimed for these students at no more than 5% of the district’s total reported full-time equivalent enrollment of special part-time and full-time students. (EC § 76002)

ANALYSIS

This bill authorizes the governing board of a community college district to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnership with the governing board of a school district within its immediate service area, as specified, to offer or expand dual enrollment opportunities with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to community college for career technical education or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness, and outlines the conditions which must be met prior to the adoption of such an agreement. It:

1. Authorizes the governing board of a community college district to enter into a CCAP partnership with the governing board of a school district that is governed by a CCAP agreement approved by the governing boards of both districts.

2. Requires, as a condition of and prior to adopting a CCAP partnership agreement, that both districts present and take public comment on the proposed agreement at public meetings of their respective boards, first as an informational item, and then, at a subsequent meeting, approve or disapprove the proposed agreement.

3. Authorizes a participating community college district to:

1. Assign priority enrollment and registration to high school students enrolling in community college courses required for the partnership program equivalent to that which exists for Middle College High School participants under current law.

2. Limit enrollment in a course solely to eligible high school students if the course is offered at a high school campus during the regular school day pursuant to a CCAP agreement.

3. Allow special part-time students to enroll in up to a maximum of 15 units per term if the units constitute no more than 4 community classes and are part of a CCAP academic program designed to award students both a high school diploma and an associate’s degree.

4. Outlines various requirements and authorities for districts that adopt a CCAP.

1. Requires the following in regards to the agreement.

1. An outline of the terms of the partnership, and may include, but not be limited to, the scope, nature, and schedule of courses offered, and the criteria to assess the ability of pupils to benefit from those courses, and requires the agreement to establish protocols for information sharing, joint facilities use, and parental consent for pupils.

2. Identification of a point of contact for the participating school and community college districts.

3. Filing of the agreement with the Office of the Chancellor of the California Community College (CCC) and the California Department of Education prior to the start of the partnership.

2. Establishes the following prohibitions:

1. Prohibits a community college district from entering into a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnership with a school district within the service area of another community college district, unless an agreement exists or is established between the community college districts authorizing the partnership.

2. Prohibits a community college district from providing physical education course opportunities to high school pupils, or any other course opportunities that do not assist in the attainment of the goals of a CCPA, as specified.

3. Prohibits any high school pupil from being assessed any course-related fees, as specified, for a community college course offered through a CCPA and specifically authorizes a community college district to exempt students enrolled in CCPA courses, in whole or in part, from student representation, non-resident, transcript, apprentice course, per unit, and child care fees.

3. Establishes requirements relative to instructors. It requires the agreement to:

1. Certify that any community college instructor teaching a course on a high school campus has not been convicted of any sex offenses or any controlled substance offenses, as specified.

2. Certify that no community college instructor or qualified high school teacher has been displaced or terminated as the result of the same course being offered by their counterpart at a partnering high school or community college campus.

3. Certify that community college courses offered for college credit at the high school do not reduce access to the same course offered at the partnering community college campus.

4. Certify that both the CCC and school district comply with local bargaining agreements and all state/federal reporting requirements regarding the qualifications of the instructors teaching partnership courses for high school credit.

5. Specify which district will be the employer of record for purposes of assignment monitoring and reporting to the county office of education, and will assume reporting responsibility pursuant to federal teacher quality mandates.

6. Certify that remedial courses taught by community college faculty at the high school campus will only be offered to students testing as nonproficient in math, English, or both, on a 10^th or 11^th grade formative assessment, as determined by the school district.

4. Establishes the following funding provisions:

1. Requires that, for purposes of allowance and apportionments of the State School Fund, a community college district conducting a closed course on a high school campus be credited with additional units of full-time equivalent students (FTES) attributable to the attendance of eligible high school pupils.

2. Prohibits a district participating in a partnership from receiving a state allowance or apportionment for an instructional activity for which the partnering district has been, or shall be, paid an allowance or apportionment.

3. Provides that attendance of a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) high school student at a community college as a special part-time or full-time student is authorized attendance for which the community college is credited or reimbursed under existing statutory authority, provided that no school district has received reimbursement for the same instructional activity.

5. Requires for each CCAP partnership agreement entered into, that the affected school district and community college district annually report as specified to the California Community College (CCC) Chancellor's Office, and to the Legislature, the Department of Finance, and the Superintendent of Public Instruction and requires that these reports include:

1. An evaluation of the CCAP partnerships and recommendations regarding program improvements, including the need for additional student assistance or academic resources to ensure the CCAP partnerships’ overall success.

2. Total number of students enrolled at each schoolsite by gender and ethnicity, total number of CCC courses and course completions, as well as percentage of course completions by category, type, and schoolsite, and the total number of full-time equivalent students (FTES) generated by participants.

6. Provides that violation of these provisions by a community college district makes the district subject to the imposition of restrictions on interdistrict attendance and a penalty of retention of up to 5% of its appropriation under community college apportionment provisions.

STAFF COMMENTS

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, the overall goal of this bill is to increase the accessibility of concurrent enrollment programs to a broader range of students, including lower achieving students in order to integrate them into a college environment, reduce the need for college remediation in math and English, increase the likelihood a degree program will be completed, decrease the length of time to complete a degree program, and stimulate interest in higher education among high school students.

2. Related History. In December 2002, the Orange County Register ran the first in a series of highly critical articles regarding concurrent enrollment practices in the community colleges. The articles specifically focused on high school physical education (PE) classes and various suspected abuses.

These anecdotal allegations resulted in a Chancellor’s Office investigation which revealed that full-time equivalent students (FTES) generated by concurrent enrollment in both credit and noncredit courses grew from approximately 16,000 in 1992-93 to over 52,000 in 2000-01, outpacing the overall enrollment growth of the community college system. While concurrent enrollment included courses in a variety of curricular areas, there had been significant growth in concurrent enrollment in PE courses. The proportion of FTES for concurrent enrollment in PE courses was approximately 15% in 1992-93, but these courses comprised 34% of FTES for concurrent enrollment in 2000-01, the equivalent of 1.7% of all the FTES generated by the community colleges as a system. The expansion of concurrent enrollment in PE courses was more pronounced in about one-fifth (20%) of the system’s 72 districts and was especially evident with respect to PE programs. By 2001-02, six districts within the system produced 53% of the PE concurrent enrollment FTES generated by the entire system for that year. These districts included Los Angeles, Butte, North Orange, Contra Costa, Santa Clarita, and Mt. San Antonio.

As a result, SB 338 (Scott, Chapter 786, Statutes of 2003) was enacted to specify the conditions whereby concurrent enrollment of pupils between a school and community college district is permitted, establish restrictions on the amount of FTES that could be claimed for PE courses, and require annual reporting by the Chancellor of the amount of FTES claimed by each district for special full-time and special part-time students overall and for PE courses specifically.

.

3. Existing concurrent enrollment options. Community college districts have several statutorily authorized means by which apportionment can be claimed for minors enrolled by the district. These include:

1. Special part-time full time students. Current law authorizes a school district governing board to recommend students who would benefit from advanced scholastic or vocational work for attendance at a community college upon recommendation of the principal, and limits the number of students who can be recommended for summer session enrollments to 5% of the students in each grade. Community colleges are authorized to claim FTES reimbursement for these students only if the course is open and advertised to the general public. The proportion of a community college physical education (PE) class that may be comprised of special part-time or full-time students cannot exceed 10% and apportionment for these students cannot exceed 5% of the district’s total reported full-time equivalent students (FTES) for special part-time and full-time students. Students are limited to enrolling in a maximum of 11 units per semester, and must be assigned low enrollment priority by the college to avoid displacement of adults.

2. Early College High Schools (ECHS) and Middle College High Schools (MCHS). ECHS are designed for young people who are underrepresented in postsecondary education, including students who have not had access to the academic preparation needed to meet college readiness standards, students for whom the cost of college is prohibitive, students of color, first generation college-goers, and English language learners. MCHS is a collaborative program that enables high-potential, "at-risk" students to obtain a high school education while concurrently receiving direct access to college courses and services. High school students attend classes at a community college and earn credit toward a high school diploma while having the opportunity to concurrently take college courses and to receive more intensive counseling and administrative attention. According to Job for the Future, which launched ECHS in 2002, there are currently 40 ECHS in California, of which 92% are partnered with a community college. According to the Chancellor’s Office 9 community colleges offer recognized middle college programs. These programs are subject to the same conditions that exist for special admit students, with the exception that MCHS students are exempt from the low enrollment priority provisions for classes necessary for completion of their programs.

3. College Promise Partnership Act. SB 650 (Lowenthal, Chapter 633, Statutes of 2011) authorized a partnership between the Long Beach community college and school district to provide a seamless bridge to college for students who were not already college bound and to reduce the time needed for advanced students to complete programs. These students are exempted from the requirements applicable to special admit students that they must be recommended by the school principal. The community college is eligible to receive FTES for these students but is prohibited from receiving apportionment for instructional activity for which the school district received apportionment. The community college is required to provide for an independent evaluation, as specified, to be presented to the Chancellor and the Legislature by December 30, 2016. The authority for this partnership sunsets on January 1, 2018.

This bill would create yet another category of special admit options, the College and Career Access Pathways Act. According to the sponsor, this bill is intended to authorize a model more like the Long Beach Promise that offers dual enrollment as a pathway, rather than a series of disconnected individual courses, and, unlike ECHS and MCHS, provides greater flexibility in the delivery of courses at the high school campus. Unlike existing concurrent enrollment options, this bill would authorize community colleges to offer courses that are closed to the general public if offered on a high school campus, to grant special admit students higher enrollment priority than currently possible, and to exceed the current 11 unit cap per semester if the student is receiving both a high school diploma and an associate’s degree.

4. Why expand dual enrollment options? According to a February 2014 report by Education Commission of the States (ECS), the number of U. S. public high schools offering concurrent enrollment programs is growing, with 82% providing such opportunities in 2011-12. Academic research and state experience highlight the benefits of concurrent enrollment programs for improving college going rates, particularly for minority and/or low-income students. Additionally, ECS finds that with the possible exception of the state of Massachusetts, minority and/or low-income students tend to be underrepresented in statewide concurrent enrollment programs.

Similarly, in a 2012 report on its Concurrent Courses Initiative, the Irvine Foundation found that participants in dual enrollment programs that focused on underrepresented students had better academic outcomes relative to comparison students in the same districts. They were:

1. More likely to graduate from high school.

2. More likely to transition to a four-year college (rather than a two-year college).

3. Less likely to take basic skills courses in college.

4. More likely to persist in postsecondary education.

5. Accumulating more college credits than comparison students.

The stated intent of this bill is to provide dual enrollment to a broader range of students, including lower achieving students, and to reduce remediation, increase degree completion, decrease time to degree, and stimulate interest in higher education among high school students. To ensure that CCAP partnerships accomplish this goal, staff recommends the bill be amended on page 3 line 31 to insert “for students who may not already be college bound or who are underrepresented in higher education.”

5. What proportion is reasonable? The chart below summarizes the trends around special admits in relation to total full-time equivalent students for the community colleges for the last decade.

As noted in staff comment #2, the current restrictions on special admits were the result of perceived abuses in the past. What is the potential for abuse of this new authority? How much of community college apportionments should be used for educating high school students? How do we ensure that the expansion of special admits does not come at the expense of the core mission of the community colleges to serve adults?

Staff recommends the bill be amended to cap the statewide full-time equivalent students (FTES) which may be claimed for special admits at 7% of total FTES, in order to allow for the growth of these programs, yet ensure that the vast majority of community college funding continues to be used for its core mission of serving adults.

Staff further recommends, consistent with prior actions on a similar bill, that the bill be amended to sunset this authority in 2022, pending a review of the reports required under the bill’s provisions.

6. Chancellor’s Office oversight? This bill establishes a fairly open ended authority for all districts to implement dual enrollment programs with much greater flexibility than possible under current law. In light of the past issues around concurrent enrollment, is “certification” of compliance with the bill’s requirements sufficient? How will the Chancellor’s Office ensure that the statewide cap on special admit full-time equivalent students (FTES) is not exceeded?

Staff recommends the bill be amended on page 4 in subdivision (c)(1) to additionally require that the partnership agreement specify the total number of high school students to be served and the total FTES projected to be claimed by the community college district for these students.

Staff also recommends the bill be amended on page 5 subdivision (k) to additionally require that the agreement must include certification by the participating community college district that participation in the partnership is consistent with the core mission of the colleges pursuant to section 66010.4 and that instruction of high school partnership students does not result in the displacement of otherwise eligible adults in the community college.

Staff further recommends the bill be amended on page 4 line 19 to insert, “The Chancellor’s Office shall have the authority to disallow any agreement it determines has not complied with the intent of the requirements of this section.”

7. Fees. This bill appropriately prohibits assessment of course fees on any high school student participating in a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnership. However, subdivision (q) on page 6 authorizes a community college governing board to exempt these students from various other fees, suggesting that the board could also choose not to exempt these students from those fees. Staff recommends the bill be amended on page 6 line 38 to strike “may, in whole or in part” and insert “shall.”

8. Remedial courses. This measure creates an unprecedented policy shift by authorizing community college faculty to teach remedial courses to high school pupils whose grade 10 or 11 formative assessment indicates that they are not proficient in math, English, or both, on a high school campus. According to the sponsor, the intent is to facilitate collaboration between high school and community college faculty to deliver innovative remediation courses as an intervention in the student’s senior year to ensure the student is prepared for college level work upon graduation. Staff recommends the bill be amended to clarify that the agreement shall certify that any remedial courses taught by community college faculty shall only be offered to high school students who test as non-proficient in grade 10 or 11, and shall involve a collaborative effort between high school and community college faculty to deliver an innovative remediation course as an intervention in the student’s senior year to ensure the student is prepared for college level work upon graduation.

9. Clarify reporting requirements. According to the sponsor, it is the intent that districts report data to the Chancellor’s Office, and that the Chancellor be responsible for a summary report evaluating the CCAP partnerships. In addition to the existing recommendations required in this report, it would be use for the Legislature to be provided with a summary of trends in the growth of special admits systemwide and by campus and for the Chancellor to include recommendations for any changes to the statewide cap on special admits FTES to ensure that adults are not being displaced. Staff recommends the bill be amended on page 7 line 32 to make these additions and clarifications, and recommends that the report be required no later than January 1, 2021.

Staff further recommends that the bill be amended to clarify that the Chancellor shall also report on the full-time equivalent students (FTES) generated by CCAP partnerships in the report required under Education Code section 76002.

10. Clarification of applicability. According to the sponsor, this bill is not intended to replace or affect existing partnership agreements. However, to the extent an existing partnership wants to exercise the new authorities established by this bill, it would be required to comply with the bill’s provisions. Staff recommends the bill be amended to clarify that, “ Nothing in this section is intended to affect existing dual enrollment partnership agreements under which an existing early college high school, middle college high school or California Career Pathways Trust is operated. An existing early college high school, middle college high school or California Career Pathways Trust partnership agreement is prohibited from operating as a CCAP partnership unless it complies with the provisions of this section.”

11. K-12 Local Control Funding Formula and Accountability. The K-12 school financing system was significantly reformed as part of the 2013 State budget. Among other things, the new system provides enhanced funding based on the premise that greater resources be directed to serve those student populations with the greatest educational needs, and gives K-12 districts increased spending flexibility to improve student outcomes. Under this new funding model, each LEA develops a local control and accountability plan (LCAP) that identifies locally determined goals, actions, services, and expenditures of LCFF funds for each school year in support of the state educational priorities that are specified in statute, as well as any additional local priorities. This bill requires several certifications as part of a CCAP agreement. Should these be expanded to require that K-12 partners certify that participation is consistent with their LCAPs and demonstrate how LCCF funds generated under its concentration and supplemental grants are being used within the partnership to serve these students?

12. Technical privacy protection amendments. In order to ensure that the privacy rights of minor students are fully protected staff recommends the following amendments:

1. On page 4, line 11, after “information sharing” insert “in full compliance with all applicable state and federal privacy data laws.”

2. On page 7, line 20, after “partnership” replace the rest of the sentence with “aggregated by gender and ethnicity, and reported in full compliance with all applicable state and federal privacy data laws.”

13. Related and Prior legislation.

RELATED LEGISLATION

AB 542 (Wilk), also on the Committee’s agenda today, relaxes the restrictions on community college enrollment of special part-time and full-time students enrolled in middle college and early college high schools.

PRIOR LEGISLATION

AB 1451 (Holden), until January 1, 2020, removed certain restrictions on concurrent enrollment and authorized school districts to enter into partnerships with community college districts to provide high school pupils opportunities for advanced scholastic work, career technical or other coursework at a community college campus. AB 1451 was passed by this Committee on a 7-0 vote, but was subsequently held in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

SUPPORT

Alameda Science and Technology Institute

Alhambra Unified School District

American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFL-CIO)

Association for California School Administrators

California Catholic Conference, Inc.

California Chamber of Commerce

California Community College Association for Occupational Education

California Community Colleges, The Chancellor’s Office

California EDGE Coalition

California Equity Leaders Network

California School Boards Association

California State PTA

California Teachers Association

Castro Valley Unified School District

Chaffey Community College District

Children Now

Claremont Unified School District

Community College League of California

Compton Unified School District Board of Trustees

Ed Voice

Feather River Community College District

Kern Community College District

Kern County Superintendent of Schools

Kings Canyon Unified School District

Long Beach Community College District

Los Angeles College Faculty Guild

Los Angeles Community College District

Los Angeles County Office of Education

Los Angeles Unified School District

Los Rios Community College District

Los Rios Community College District Board of Trustees

Madera County Board of Supervisors

Moreno Valley Unified School District

Mt. San Antonio College

Nevada Joint Union High School District

North Orange County Community College District

Orange County Business Council

Pasadena City College

Pasadena Community College District

Peralta Community College District

Placer Union High School District

Riverside County Superintendent of Schools

Rocklin Unified School District

Roseville Joint Union High School District

Rural County Representatives of California

Saddleback College

San Bernardino Community College District

San Diego Community College District

San Diego Community College District Board of Trustees

San Diego Unified School District

San Francisco Community College District

San Jose Evergreen Valley College District

Santa Monica College

Shasta-Tehama-Trinity Joint Community College District

Sierra Community College District

Siskiyous Joint Community College District

South Orange County Community College District

Tahoe Truckee Unified School District

Ventura County Community College District

West Contra Costa Unified School District

West Kern Community College District

Western Placer Unified School District

Yuba Community College District

OPPOSITION

None received.

-- END --

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 288

Author:(Holden and Olsen)

As Amended Ver:April 22, 2015

Majority vote

SUMMARY: Authorizes the governing board of a community college district (CCD) to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnership with the governing board of a school district with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to California Community Colleges (CCC) for career technical education (CTE) or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness. Specifically, this bill:

1. Makes findings and declarations regarding the value and benefits of dual enrollment, the need for California to rethink its policies regarding dual enrollment, and the need for the state to remove fiscal and policy barriers that discourage dual enrollment opportunities.

2. Authorizes a CCD governing board to enter into a CCAP partnership with a school district governing board for the purpose of offering or expanding dual enrollment opportunities with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to community college for CTE or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness.

3. Stipulates that as a condition of, and before adopting, a CCAP partnership agreement, the governing board of each district, at an open public meeting of that board, must present the dual enrollment partnership agreement as an informational item; and, at a subsequent open public meeting of that board, must take comments from the public and approve or disapprove the proposed agreement.

4. Specifies that the CCAP partnership agreement must:

   1. Outline the terms of the CCAP partnership and include, but not necessarily be limited to, the scope, nature, time, location, and listing of the ability of pupils to benefit from those courses;

   2. Establish protocols for information sharing, joint facilities use, and parental consent for high school pupils to enroll in community college courses; and,

   3. Identify a point of contact for the participating CCD and school district partner.

5. Requires that the CCAP partnership agreement shall certify all of the following:

   1. Any community college instructor teaching a course on a high school campus has not been convicted of any sex offense, as defined, or any controlled substance, as defined;

   2. Any community college instructor teaching a course at the partnering high school campus has not displaced or resulted in the termination of an existing high school teacher teaching the same course on that high school campus;

   3. A qualified high school teacher teaching a course offered for college credit at a high school campus has not displaced or resulted in the termination of an existing community college faculty member teaching the same course at the partnering community college campus;

   4. Both the CCD and the school district partners comply with local collective bargaining agreements and all state and federal reporting requirements regarding the qualifications of the faculty member or teacher teaching a CCAP partnership course offered for high school credit;

   5. Which participating district will be the employer of record for purposes of assignment monitoring and reporting to the county office of education and which participating district will assume reporting responsibilities pursuant to applicable federal teacher quality mandates; and

   6. Remedial courses taught by community college faculty at a partnering high school campus shall be offered only to high school students who test as non-proficient in mathematics, English or both on a formative assessment in grade 10 or 11, as determined by the partnering school district.

6. Specifies that a copy of the CCAP partnership agreement must be filed with the CCC Chancellor's Office (CCCCO) and the California Department of Education before the start of the CCAP partnership.

7. Specifies that a CCD participating in a CCAP partnership shall not provide physical education course opportunities to high school pupils, as specified.

8. Specifies that a high school pupil enrolled in a course offered through the CCAP partnership cannot be charged any fee that is prohibited, as specified.

9. Specifies that a CCD participating in a CCAP partnership may assign priority for enrollment and course registration to a pupil seeking to enroll in a community college course that is required for the pupil's CCAP partnership program that is equivalent to the priority assigned to a pupil attending a middle college high school, as specified.

10. Specifies that a CCD may limit enrollment in a community college course solely to eligible high school students if the course is offered at a high school campus during the regular school day and the community college course is offered pursuant to a CCAP agreement.

11. Provides that a CCD conducting a closed course on a high school campus, as specified, shall be credited with those units of full-time equivalent students (FTES) attributable to the attendance of eligible high school pupils.

12. Specifies that a CCD may allow a special part-time student participating in a CCAP partnership agreement to enroll in up to a maximum of 15 units per term if all of the following circumstances are satisfied:

    1. The units constitute no more than four community college courses per term;

    2. The units are part of an academic program that is part of a CCAP; and,

    3. The units are part of an academic program that is designed to award students both a high school diploma and an associate's degree.

13. Provides that the governing board of a CCD participating in a CCAP partnership agreement may, in whole or part, exempt special part-time students, as specified, from fee requirements, as specified.

14. Provides that a district shall not receive a state allowance or apportionment for an instructional activity for which the partnering district has been, or shall be, paid an allowance or apportionment.

15. Provides that attendance of a high school pupil at a community college as a special part-time or full-time student, as specified, is authorized attendance for which the community college shall be credited or reimbursed, provided that no school district has received reimbursement for the same instructional activity.

16. Provides that for each CCAP partnership agreement entered into, the affected CCD and the school district shall annually report to the CCCCO all of the following information:

    1. Total number of high school pupils by school site enrolled in each CCAP partnership;

    2. Total number of community college courses by course category and type and by school site enrolled in by CCAP partnership participants;

    3. Total number and percentage of successful course completions, by course category and type and by school site, of CCAP partnership participants;

    4. Total number of FTES generated by CCAP partnership CCD participants; and

    5. An evaluation of the CCAP partnerships and, based upon the date collected, recommendations for program improvement, including, but not necessarily limited to, the need for additional student assistance or academic resources to ensure the overall success of the CCAP partnerships.

17. Requires the CCAP partnership report to the CCCCO to be transmitted to the Legislature, Director of Finance, and the State Superintendent of Public Instruction.

18. Provides that a community college district that violates this article, including, but limited to, any restriction imposed by the board of governors pursuant to this article, shall be subject to restrictions on interdistrict transfer.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Authorizes the governing board of a school district, upon recommendation of the principal of a student’s school of attendance, and with parental consent, to authorize a student who would benefit from advanced scholastic or vocational work to attend a community college as a special part-time or full-time student. Additionally, current law prohibited a principal from recommending, for community college summer session attendance, more than 5% of the total number of students in the same grade level and exempted from the 5% cap a student recommended by his or her principal for enrollment in a college-level summer session course if the course in which the pupil was enrolled met specified criteria. These exemptions were repealed on January 1, 2014 (Education Code (EC) Section 48800, et seq.).

2. Prohibits a pupil enrolled in a public school from being required to pay a pupil fee for participation in an educational activity; and, specifies that all of the following requirements apply to the prohibition:

   1. All supplies, materials, and equipment needed to participate in educational activities shall be provided to pupils free of charge;

   2. A fee waiver policy shall not make a pupil fee permissible;

   3. School districts and schools shall not establish a two-tier educational system by requiring a minimal educational standard and also offering a second, higher educational standard that pupils may only obtain via payment of a fee or purchase of additional supplies that the school district does not provide; and,

   4. A school district or school shall not offer course credit or privileges related to educational activities in exchange for money or donations of goods or services from a pupil or a pupil’s parents or guardians, and a school district or school shall not remove course credit or privileges related to educational activities, or otherwise discriminate against a pupil, because the pupil or the pupil's parents or guardians did not or will not provide money or donations of goods or services to the school district or school (EC Section 49011).

3. Requires the CCCCO to report to the Department of Finance and Legislature annually on the amount of FTES claimed by each CCC district for high school pupils enrolled in non-credit, non-degree applicable, and degree applicable courses; and provides that, for purposes of receiving state apportionments, CCC districts may only include high school students within the CCC district’s report on FTES if the students are enrolled in courses that are open to the general public, as specified. Additionally, current law requires the governing board of a CCC district to assign a low enrollment priority to special part-time or full-time students in order to ensure that these students do not displace regularly admitted community college students (EC Sections 76001 and 76002).

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee:

1. To the extent CCDs can claim apportionment funding for additional concurrently enrolled students, there will be increased General Fund (Proposition 98 (1988)) costs. The equivalent of only 33 additional FTES statewide, at the current funding rate of $4,676 per FTES would exceed $150,000. To the extent, however, that community colleges as a whole are already using all state funds apportioned for enrollment, this measure will result in unknown Prop 98 cost pressures to allocate additional state funding to the CCC's for enrollment growth.

2. To the extent this measure results in more students accelerating their postsecondary education—by reducing their need for post-high school remediation and/or by reducing their time to degree—the state and students will benefit from these efficiencies. To the extent more students obtain needed remediation through community college courses, rather than upon entering the California State University, the state will realize savings equal to the difference in state support per student between the two segments.

COMMENTS: Concurrent and dual enrollment background. According to New Directions for Community Colleges, no. 169, Spring 2015, the practice for offering college courses to high school students stems from local practice in many states and was initiated between CCDs and local school districts, but the practice proceeded without clear state policy guidelines, regulations, or direction; resulting in variation in local practice. Some states, such as Minnesota, as far back as the 1980s, were early adopters of state dual credit policies, whereby their state policies provided a framework for offering college courses to high school students and the students receiving both college and high school credit for some of their courses.

Concurrent enrollment provides pupils the opportunity to enroll in college courses and earn college credit while still enrolled in high school. Currently, a pupil is allowed to concurrently enroll in a CCC as a "special admit" while still attending high school, if the pupil's school district determines that the pupil would benefit from "advanced scholastic or vocational work." Special-admit students have typically been advanced pupils wanting to take more challenging coursework or pupils who come from high schools where Advanced Placement or honors courses are not widely available. Additionally, programs such as middle college high schools and early college high schools use concurrent enrollment to offer instructional programs for at-risk pupils that focus on college preparatory curricula. These programs are developed through partnerships between a school district and a CCC. During summer session at a CCC, principals are limited to recommending no more than 5% of their pupils in each grade level to enroll at a CCC during a summer session. Existing law provides certain exemptions to this process (as aforementioned in current law above). These exemptions expired on January 1, 2014.

Purpose of this bill. The author states, "Gradually more students are entering community colleges and some CSUs [California State University] assessing below college-level. Consequently, more courses are being offered on their respective campuses to prepare students for college level coursework." The author contends that, "This measure will increase the accessibility of concurrent enrollment programs in order to continue to achieve the goal of helping low achieving students integrate into a college environment, increase the likelihood a degree program will be completed, decrease the length of time to complete a degree program, and stimulate interest in higher education among high school students."

How many? According to the CCCCO's statutorily required report on special admit enrollments: 26,604 (the most recent data available to date) special admit students were claimed systemwide, in summer 2013, with 22,432 of the students successfully completing and passing their courses. The summer 2013 numbers have slightly increased when compared to the previous last couple of years; however, the 2013 numbers remain significantly lower when compared to summer 2007, when of the 68,708 special admit students claimed systemwide, 53,387 successfully completed and passed their courses.

Double-dipping? There is a common perception that concurrent enrollment courses require a state to "pay twice" for a student to take a single course. However, according to Education Commission of the States (ECS), "If the dual enrollment opportunity is strong, rather than paying twice, states are paying earlier." ECS concludes that the state is consolidating two payments into one if the community college course that the high school pupil takes is transferable to the postsecondary institution where he or she later enrolls.

To address this issue, this measure specifies that a district shall not receive a state allowance or apportionment for an instructional activity for which the partnering district has been, or shall be, paid an allowance or apportionment.

Analysis Prepared by: Jeanice Warden / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960 FN: 0000753

Date of Hearing: May 13, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Jimmy Gomez, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 288

Author:(Holden) – As Amended Ver:April 22, 2015

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

SUMMARY:

This bill authorizes school districts and community college districts (CCDs) to enter into College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnerships, as specified, to provide seamless pathways from high school to community college for career technical education (CTE) or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils to achieve college and career readiness. Specifically, this bill:

1. Allows a CCD, as part of a partnership, to assign priority for enrollment and course registration—for a pupil seeking to enroll in a course under his or her CCAP partnership program—equivalent to the priority assigned to a middle college high school student.

2. Authorizes a CCD to limit enrollment in a community college course, pursuant to a partnership agreement, which is solely offered to high school students if held on a high school campus during the school day.

3. Provides that a CCD may allow a high school student, pursuant to a partnership, to enroll in up to 15 units (up to 4 courses) per term that are part of an academic program designed to award the student a high school diploma and an associate's degree, and provides that the CCD shall be credited with the attendance attributable such pupils for purposes of state apportionment.

4. Prohibits a district from receiving a state apportionment for an instructional activity for which the partnering district is paid an apportionment.

5. Requires partnering districts to report specified data annually to the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges (CCC), who must transmit the report to the Legislature, the Governor, and the Superintendent of Public Instruction.

FISCAL EFFECT:

1. To the extent CCDs can claim apportionment funding for additional concurrently enrolled students, there will be increased General Fund (Prop 98) costs. The equivalent of only 33 additional full-time equivalent students (FTES) statewide, at the current funding rate of $4,676 per FTES would exceed $150,000. To the extent, however, that community colleges as a whole are already using all state funds apportioned for enrollment, the bill will result in unknown Prop 98 cost pressure to allocate additional state funding to the CCC's for enrollment growth.

2. To the extent the bill results in more students accelerating their postsecondary education—by reducing their need for post-high school remediation and/or by reducing their time to degree—the state and students will benefit from these efficiencies. To the extent more students obtain needed remediation through community college courses, rather than upon entering the California State University, the state will realize savings equal to the difference in state support per student between the two segments.

COMMENTS:

1. Background. Concurrent enrollment provides pupils the opportunity to enroll in college courses and earn college credit while still enrolled in high school. A pupil is allowed to concurrently enroll in a CCC as a "special admit" while still attending high school, if the pupil's school district determines that the pupil would benefit from "advanced scholastic or vocational work." Special-admit students have typically been advanced pupils wanting to take more challenging coursework or pupils who come from high schools where Advanced Placement or honors courses are not widely available. Additionally, programs such as middle college high schools and early college high schools use concurrent enrollment to offer instructional programs for at-risk pupils that focus on college preparatory curricula.

2. Purpose. The author states, "Gradually more students are entering community colleges and some CSUs [California State University] assessing below college-level. Consequently, more courses are being offered on their respective campuses to prepare students for college level coursework." The author contends that, "This measure will increase the accessibility of concurrent enrollment programs in order to continue to achieve the goal of helping low achieving students integrate into a college environment, increase the likelihood a degree program will be completed, decrease the length of time to complete a degree program, and stimulate interest in higher education among high school students."

3. Related Legislation. AB 889 (Chang), also on today's committee agenda, provides for partnership agreements between districts and CCDs so that students can take STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) courses at a community college if the student has exhausted all opportunities to enroll for such courses in the district.

AB 542 (Wilk), pending on this committee's Suspense file, allows a student attending an early or middle college high school (E/MCHS), who is enrolled in a community college physical education (P. E.) course required for the student's E/MCHS program, to not be considered as a special part-time or full-time student for purposes of existing enrollment caps on special part-time and full-time students.

4. Prior Legislation. AB 1451 (Holden) of 2014, which was similar to this bill, was held on Suspense in Senate Appropriations.

In 2011, AB 160 (Portantino), which also authorized concurrent enrollment partnerships, was held on Suspense in Senate Appropriations.

Analysis Prepared by: Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: April 29, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Patrick O'Donnell, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 288

Author:(Holden) – As Amended Ver:April 22, 2015

SUBJECT: Public schools: College and Career Access Pathways partnerships

SUMMARY: Authorizes the governing board of a community college district (CCD) to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnership with the governing board of a school district with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to California Community Colleges (CCC) for career technical education (CTE) or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness. Specifically, this bill:

1. Makes findings and declarations regarding the value and benefits of dual enrollment, the need for California to rethink its policies regarding dual enrollment, and the need for the state to remove fiscal and policy barriers that discourage dual enrollment opportunities.

2. Authorizes a CCD governing board to enter into a CCAP partnership with a school district governing board for the purpose of offering or expanding dual enrollment opportunities with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to community college for CTE or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness.

3. Stipulates that as a condition of, and before adopting, a CCAP partnership agreement, the governing board of each district, at an open public meeting of that board, must present the dual enrollment partnership agreement as an informational item; and, at a subsequent open public meeting of that board, must take comments from the public and approve or disapprove the proposed agreement.

4. Specifies that the CCAP partnership agreement must:

1. Outline the terms of the CCAP partnership and include, but not necessarily be limited to, the scope, nature, time, location, and listing of the ability of pupils to benefit from those courses;

2. Establish protocols for information sharing, joint facilities use, and parental consent for high school pupils to enroll in community college courses; and,

3. Identify a point of contact for the participating CCD and school district partner.

5. Requires that the CCAP partnership agreement shall certify all of the following:

1. Any community college instructor teaching a course on a high school campus has not been convicted of any sex offense, as defined, or any controlled substance, as defined;

2. Any community college instructor teaching a course at the partnering high school campus has not displaced or resulted in the termination of an existing high school teacher teaching the same course on that high school campus;

3. A qualified high school teacher teaching a course offered for college credit at a high school campus has not displaced or resulted in the termination of an existing community college faculty member teaching the same course at the partnering community college campus;

4. Both the CCD and the school district partners comply with local collective bargaining agreements and all state and federal reporting requirements regarding the qualifications of the faculty member or teacher teaching a CCAP partnership course offered for high school credit;

5. Which participating district will be the employer of record for purposes of assignment monitoring and reporting to the county office of education and which participating district will assume reporting responsibilities pursuant to applicable federal teacher quality mandates; and

6. Remedial courses taught by community college faculty at a partnering high school campus shall be offered only to high school students who test as non-proficient in mathematics, English or both on a formative assessment in grade 10 or 11, as determined by the partnering school district.

6. Specifies that a copy of the CCAP partnership agreement must be filed with the CCCCO and the California Department of Education before the start of the CCAP partnership.

7. Specifies that a CCD participating in a CCAP partnership shall not provide physical education course opportunities to high school pupils, as specified.

8. Specifies that a high school pupil enrolled in a course offered through the CCAP partnership cannot be charged any fee that is prohibited, as specified.

9. Specifies that a CCD participating in a CCAP partnership may assign priority for enrollment and course registration to a pupil seeking to enroll in a community college course that is required for the pupil's CCAP partnership program that is equivalent to the priority assigned to a pupil attending a middle college high school, as specified.

10. Specifies that a CCD may limit enrollment in a community college course solely to eligible high school students if the course is offered at a high school campus during the regular school day and the community college course is offered pursuant to a CCAP agreement.

11. Provides that a CCD conducting a closed course on a high school campus, as specified, shall be credited with those units of full-time equivalent students (FTES) attributable to the attendance of eligible high school pupils.

12. Specifies that a CCD may allow a special part-time student participating in a CCAP partnership agreement to enroll in up to a maximum of 15 units per term if all of the following circumstances are satisfied:

1. The units constitute no more than four community college courses per term;

2. The units are part of an academic program that is part of a CCAP; and,

3. The units are part of an academic program that is designed to award students both a high school diploma and an associate's degree.

13. Provides that the governing board of a CCD participating in a CCAP partnership agreement may, in whole or part, exempt special part-time students, as specified, from fee requirements, as specified.

14. Provides that a district shall not receive a state allowance or apportionment for an instructional activity for which the partnering district has been, or shall be, paid an allowance or apportionment.

15. Provides that attendance of a high school pupil at a community college as a special part-time or full-time student, as specified, is authorized attendance for which the community college shall be credited or reimbursed, provided that no school district has received reimbursement for the same instructional activity.

16. Provides that for each CCAP partnership agreement entered into, the affected CCD and the school district shall annually report to the CCCCO all of the following information:

1. Total number of high school pupils by school site enrolled in each CCAP partnership;

2. Total number of community college courses by course category and type and by school site enrolled in by CCAP partnership participants;

3. Total number and percentage of successful course completions, by course category and type and by school site, of CCAP partnership participants;

4. Total number of FTES generated by CCAP partnership CCD participants; and

5. An evaluation of the CCAP partnerships and, based upon the date collected, recommendations for program improvement, including, but not necessarily limited to, the need for additional student assistance or academic resources to ensure the overall success of the CCAP partnerships.

17. Requires the CCAP partnership report to the CCCCO to be transmitted to the Legislature, Director of Finance (DOF), and the State Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI).

18. Provides that a community college district that violates this article, including, but limited to, any restriction imposed by the board of governors pursuant to this article, shall be subject to restrictions on interdistrict transfer.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Authorizes the governing board of a school district, upon recommendation of the principal of a student’s school of attendance, and with parental consent, to authorize a student who would benefit from advanced scholastic or vocational work to attend a community college as a special part-time or full-time student.

2. Prohibits a pupil enrolled in a public school from being required to pay a pupil fee for participation in an educational activity; and, specifies that all of the following requirements apply to the prohibition:

1. All supplies, materials, and equipment needed to participate in educational activities shall be provided to pupils free of charge;

2. A fee waiver policy shall not make a pupil fee permissible;

3. School districts and schools shall not establish a two-tier educational system by requiring a minimal educational standard and also offering a second, higher educational standard that pupils may only obtain via payment of a fee or purchase of additional supplies that the school district does not provide; and,

4. A school district or school shall not offer course credit or privileges related to educational activities in exchange for money or donations of goods or services from a pupil or a pupil’s parents or guardians, and a school district or school shall not remove course credit or privileges related to educational activities, or otherwise discriminate against a pupil, because the pupil or the pupil’s parents or guardians did not or will not provide money or donations of goods or services to the school district or school (EC Section 49011).

3. Requires the CCC Chancellor’s Office to report to the Department of Finance and Legislature annually on the amount of FTES claimed by each CCC district for high school pupils enrolled in non-credit, non-degree applicable, and degree applicable courses; and provides that, for purposes of receiving state apportionments, CCC districts may only include high school students within the CCC district’s report on FTES if the students are enrolled in courses that are open to the general public, as specified. Additionally, current law requires the governing board of a CCC district to assign a low enrollment priority to special part-time or full-time students in order to ensure that these students do not displace regularly admitted community college students (EC Sections 76001 and 76002).

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown

COMMENTS: Concurrent and dual enrollment background. According to New Directions for Community Colleges, no. 169, Spring 2015, the practice for offering college courses to high school students stems from local practice in many states and was initiated between CCDs and local school districts, but the practice proceeded without clear state policy guidelines, regulations, or direction; resulting in variation in local practice. Some states, such as Minnesota, as far back as the 1980s, were early adopters of state dual credit policies, whereby their state policies provided a framework for offering college courses to high school students and the students receiving both college and high school credit for some of their courses.

Concurrent enrollment provides pupils the opportunity to enroll in college courses and earn college credit while still enrolled in high school. Currently, a pupil is allowed to concurrently enroll in a CCC as a "special admit" while still attending high school, if the pupil's school district determines that the pupil would benefit from "advanced scholastic or vocational work." Special-admit students have typically been advanced pupils wanting to take more challenging coursework or pupils who come from high schools where Advanced Placement or honors courses are not widely available. Additionally, programs such as middle college high schools and early college high schools use concurrent enrollment to offer instructional programs for at-risk pupils that focus on college preparatory curricula. These programs are developed through partnerships between a school district and a CCC. During summer session at a CCC, principals are limited to recommending no more than 5% of their pupils in each grade level to enroll at a CCC during a summer session. Existing law provides certain exemptions to this process (as aforementioned in current law above). These exemptions expired on January 1, 2014.

According to a February 2014 report by Education Commission of the States (ECS), the number of U. S. public high schools offering concurrent enrollment programs is growing, with 82% providing such opportunities in 2011-12. Academic research and state experience highlight the benefits of concurrent enrollment programs for improving college rates, particularly for minority and/or low-income students. Additionally, ECS finds that with the possible exception of the state of Massachusetts, minority and/or low-income students tend to be underrepresented in statewide concurrent enrollment programs.

Purpose of this bill. The author states, "Gradually more students are entering community colleges and some CSUs [California State University] assessing below college-level. Consequently, more courses are being offered on their respective campuses to prepare students for college level coursework." The author contends that, "This measure will increase the accessibility of concurrent enrollment programs in order to continue to achieve the goal of helping low achieving students integrate into a college environment, increase the likelihood a degree program will be completed, decrease the length of time to complete a degree program, and stimulate interest in higher education among high school students."

How many? According to the CCCCO's statutorily required report on special admit enrollments: 26,604 (the most recent data available to date) special admit students were claimed systemwide, in summer 2013, with 22,432 of the students successfully completing and passing their courses. The summer 2013 numbers have slightly increased when compared to the previous last couple of years; however, the 2013 numbers remain significantly lower when compared to summer 2007, when of the 68,708 special admit students claimed systemwide, 53,387 successfully completed and passed their courses.

Double-dipping? There is a common perception that concurrent enrollment courses require a state to "pay twice" for a student to take a single course. However, according to ECS, "If the dual enrollment opportunity is strong, rather than paying twice, states are paying earlier." ECS concludes that the state is consolidating two payments into one if the community college course that the high school pupil takes is transferable to the postsecondary institution where he or she later enrolls. To address this issue, this measure specifies that a district shall not receive a state allowance or apportionment for an instructional activity for which the partnering district has been, or shall be, paid an allowance or apportionment

Highly qualified teachers. Federal law requires all states to take the following actions with regard to "highly qualified teachers:"

• Measure the extent to which all students have highly qualified teachers, particularly minority and disadvantaged students;

• Adopt goals and plans to ensure all teachers are highly qualified; and

• Publicly report plans and progress in meeting teacher quality goals.

In order to be designated as highly qualified, a teacher must be certificated. However, the highly qualified teacher requirement does not apply to community college faculty. This bill avoids the federal requirement by allowing the community college district to be designated as the employer of record.

Students who are concurrently enrolled under existing law can earn high school credit as well as college credit for courses taken. Under existing law, however, those courses are taught at a college campus and the number of students who may be concurrently enrolled is limited. This bill allows courses to be taken for dual credit at a high school and does not impose a limit on the number of students who can be concurrently enrolled. Under the partnership, courses for high school credit can be taught by a community college instructor who is not credentialed, which moves us in the opposition direction of federal requirement. Certification means a teacher has not only the subject matter knowledge, but also the pedagogical training and experience needed to effectively teach high school-aged students. While concurrent enrollment offers many advantages, the committee may wish to consider how far California should go in relaxing the requirement that courses for high school credit be taught by certificated teachers.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Academic Senate for the California Community Colleges

California Catholic Conference, Inc.

California Chamber of Commerce

California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office

California Edge Coalition

California School Boards Association

Chaffey College

Children Now

College of the Siskiyous

Community College League of California

Compton Unified School District

Design Science Early College High School Boosters Club

EdVoice

Freemont Union High School District

Gentrain Society

Irvine Valley College

Kern Community College District

Los Angeles Community College District

Los Angeles Unified School District

Los Rios Community College District

Napa Valley Community College District

North Orange County Community College District

Monterey Peninsula Community College District

Orange County Business Council

Pasadena Community College District

Peralta Community College District

Rural County Representatives of California

San Bernardino Community College District

San Diego Community College District

San Diego Unified School District

San Francisco Community College District

Santa Rosa Junior College

Saddleback College

South Orange County Community College District

West Kern Community College District

Yuba Community College District

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: Rick Pratt / ED. / (916) 319-2087

Date of Hearing: April 7, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION

Jose Medina, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 288

Author:(Holden) – As Amended Ver:March 23, 2015

[Note: This bill is doubled referred to the Assembly Education Committee and will be heard as it relates to issues under its jurisdiction.]

SUBJECT: Public schools: College and Career Access Pathways partnerships

SUMMARY: Authorizes the governing board of a community college district (CCD) to enter into a College and Career Access Pathways (CCAP) partnership with the governing board of a school district with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school to California Community Colleges (CCC) for career technical education (CTE) or preparation for transfer, improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils achieve college and career readiness; requires the CCAP partnership agreement to outline the terms of the partnership, as specified; and requires each participating CCD and school district to provide an annual report to the to the CCC Chancellor's Office (CCCCO). Specifically, this bill:

1. Declares the following findings of the Legislature:

1. Research has shown that dual enrollment can be an effective means of improving the educational outcomes for a broad range of students;

2. Dual enrollment has historically targeted high-achieving students; however, increasingly, educators and policymakers are looking toward dual enrollment as a strategy to help students who struggle academically or who are at risk of dropping out;

3. Allowing a greater and more varied segment of high school pupils to take community college courses could provide numerous benefits to both the pupils and the state, such as reducing the number of high school dropouts, increasing the number of community college students who transfer and complete a degree, shortening the time to completion of educational goals, and improving the level of preparation of students to successfully complete for-credit, college-level, courses;

4. California should rethink its policies governing dual enrollment, and establish a policy framework under which CCDs and school districts could create dual enrollment partnerships as one strategy to provide critical support for underachieving students, those from groups underrepresented in postsecondary education, those who are seeking advanced studies while in high school, and those seeking a CTE credential or certificate;

5. Through dual enrollment partnerships, CCDs and school districts could create clear pathways of aligned, sequenced coursework that would allow students to more easily and successfully transition to for-credit, college-level coursework leading to an associate degree, transfer to the University of California or the California State University, or to a program leading to a CTE credential or certificate; and,

6. To facilitate the establishment of dual enrollment partnerships, the state should remove fiscal penalties and policy barriers that discourage dual enrollment opportunities; reducing some of these restrictions, will lead to the expansion of dual enrollment opportunities, thereby saving both students and the state valuable time, money, and scarce educational resources.