Existing law requires each school district to make a determination of the primary language of a pupil when the pupil enrolls in the school district and requires each parent or guardian of a pupil enrolled in a public school to receive notice of an assessment of a pupils English proficiency no later than 30 days after the start of the school year that includes, among other things, the reason for the pupils classification as an English learner.

This bill would require the notice of assessment of a childs English proficiency to include specified additional information, including whether a child is a long-term English learner or is an English learner at risk of becoming a long-term English learner. The bill would require a school district to provide a notification letter to a pupils parent or guardian at the time a home language survey is provided that explains the purpose of the home language survey and the procedures for identification and reclassification of English learners. The bill would require the State Department of Education to make a sample notification letter available to public schools.

Because the bill would impose additional requirements on local educational agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.

Existing law requires each school district to make a determination of the primary language of a pupil when the pupil enrolls in the school district and requires each parent or guardian of a pupil enrolled in a public school to receive notice of an assessment of a pupils English proficiency no later than 30 days after the start of the school year that includes, among other things, the reason for the pupils classification as an English learner.

This bill would require the notice of assessment of a childs English proficiency to include specified additional information, including whether a child is a long-term English learner or is an English learner at risk of becoming a long-term English learner. The bill would require a school district to provide a notification letter to a pupils parent or guardian at the time a home language survey is provided that explains the purpose of the home language survey and the procedures for identification and reclassification of English learners. The bill would require the State Department of Education to make a sample notification letter available to public schools.

Because the bill would impose additional requirements on local educational agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.

Existing law requires each school district to make a determination of the primary language of a pupil when the pupil enrolls in the school district and requires each parent or guardian of a pupil enrolled in a public school to receive notice of an assessment of a pupils English proficiency no later than 30 days after the start of the school year that includes, among other things, the reason for the pupils classification as an English learner.

This bill would require the notice of assessment of a childs English proficiency to include specified additional information, including whether a child is a long-term English learner or is an English learner at risk of becoming a long-term English learner.The learner. The bill would require a school district to provide a notification letter to a pupils parent or guardian at the time a home language survey is provided that explains the purpose of the home language survey and the procedures for identification and reclassification of English learners. The bill would require the State Department of Education to make a sample notification letter available to all public schools.

Because the bill would impose additional requirements on local educational agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.

Existing law requires a local educational agency to provide instructional services to English learners, as specified, and requires each school district to make a determination of the primary language of a pupil when the pupil enrolls in the school district and requires each parent or guardian of a pupil enrolled in a public school to receive notice of an assessment of a pupils English proficiency no later than 30 days after the start of the school year. Existing law specifies the information required to be included in the notice, including year that includes, among other things, the reason for the pupils classification as an English learner.

This bill would require the notice of assessment of a childs English proficiency to include specified additional information, including whether a child is a long-term English learner or is an English learner at risk of becoming a long-term English learner, as those terms would be defined in the bill. learner.

This The bill would require a school district to provide a notification letter to a pupils parent or guardian at the time a home language survey is provided that explains the purpose of the home language survey and the procedures for identification and reclassification of English learners. The bill would require the State Department of Education to make a sample notification letter available to all public schools.

Because the bill would impose additional requirements on local educational agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.

Existing law required the State Department of Education, by January 1, 2014, to review and analyze the criteria, policies, and practices that a sampling of school districts that represent the geographic, socioeconomic, and demographic diversity of school districts in the state use to reclassify English learners and recommend to the Legislature and State Board of Education any guideline, regulatory, or statutory changes that the department determines are necessary to identify when English learners are prepared for the successful transition to classrooms and curricula that require English proficiency. Existing law required the department to issue, by January 1, 2014, a report that includes specified findings, research, analysis, recommendations, and best practices. practices, and requires the department, by January 1, 2017, to issue an updated report that reflects any changes in analysis and recommendations as a result of the adoption by the state board of the common core standards and the English language development standards.

This bill would change the issue date of this initial report to January 1, 2019, and would delete the updated report requirement. The bill would additionally require the department, by July 1, 2016, 2022, to recommend, and the state board to adopt, the departments recommendations and best practices pursuant to the departments recommendations in the report referenced above.

Existing law required the State Department of Education, by January 1, 2014, to review and analyze the criteria, policies, and practices that a sampling of school districts that represent the geographic, socioeconomic, and demographic diversity of school districts in the state use to reclassify English learners and recommend to the Legislature and State Board of Education any guideline, regulatory, or statutory changes that the department determines are necessary to identify when English learners are prepared for the successful transition to classrooms and curricula that require English proficiency. Existing law required the department to issue, by January 1, 2014, a report that includes specified findings, research, analysis, recommendations, and best practices.

This bill would additionally require the department, by July 1, 2016, to recommend, and the state board to adopt, the departments recommendations and best practices pursuant to the departments recommendations in the report referenced above.

(1)Existing law required the State Department of Education, by January 1, 2014, to review and analyze the criteria, policies, and practices that a sampling of school districts that represent the geographic, socioeconomic, and demographic diversity of school districts in the state use to reclassify English learners and recommend to the Legislature and State Board of Education any guideline, regulatory, or statutory changes that the department determines are necessary to identify when English learners are prepared for the successful transition to classrooms and curricula that require English proficiency. Existing law required the department to issue, by January 1, 2014, a report that includes specified findings, research, analysis, recommendations, and best practices.

Existing law required the State Department of Education, by January 1, 2014, to review and analyze the criteria, policies, and practices that a sampling of school districts that represent the geographic, socioeconomic, and demographic diversity of school districts in the state use to reclassify English learners and recommend to the Legislature and State Board of Education any guideline, regulatory, or statutory changes that the department determines are necessary to identify when English learners are prepared for the successful transition to classrooms and curricula that require English proficiency. Existing law required the department to issue, by January 1, 2014, a report that includes specified findings, research, analysis, recommendations, and best practices.

This bill would make nonsubstantive changes to these provisions.

GOVERNOR'S VETO

GV Bill Id:AB 491

Author:(Gonzalez)

As Enrolled Ver:September 9, 2016

2/3 vote

(vote not relevant)

(ED.)

Original Committee Reference: ED.

SUMMARY: Requires that parents be annually informed if their children are long term English learners (LTELs) or at risk of becoming LTELs (ARLTELs), requires the California Department of Education (CDE) to develop a sample notification letter informing parents of their right to dispute school districts' determinations of primary language, and requires districts to provide the letter to parents at the time the home language survey is provided.

The Senate amendments delete the Assembly version of the bill, and instead:

1. Expand the existing parental notification requirements regarding the assessment of a student's English proficiency to contain information on:
   1. whether the child is an LTEL or an ARLTEL
   2. the manner in which the district's program for English language development (ELD) instruction will meet the educational strengths and needs of LTELSs or ARLTELs
   3. the manner in which the program for ELD instruction will help LTELs and ARLTELs develop English proficiency and meet age-appropriate academic standards
2. Requires the CDE to make available to schools a sample notification letter and requires that it be provided with the home language survey used to determine the primary language of a student at the time of enrollment.
3. Requires that the notification letter explain the purpose of the home language survey and the procedures for classification and reclassification of English learners.
4. Requires the notification letter to include, but not be limited to, the following statements:
   1. "If a language other than English is noted on your child's home language survey, the law requires us to test your child's English language proficiency."
   2. "You may dispute the school district's determination of your child's primary language and ask the school district to redetermine your child's primary language."
5. "Once your child's English language proficiency is tested and your child is identified as an English learner, changing the home language survey will not change your child's identification as an English learner."

EXISTING LAW:

1. State law aligned to the (inoperative) federal No Child Left Behind act requires that a school district that receives federal funds for providing a language instruction education program for ELs to provide notice to a parent within 30 days of the start of the school year of specified information if their child has been identified for participation in the program.
2. Defines an LTEL as a student who is a) enrolled in any of grades 6 to 12; b) has been enrolled in schools in the United States for six years or more; c) has remained at the same English language proficiency level for two or more consecutive prior years, or has regressed to a lower English language proficiency level, as determined by the English language development test, or a score determined by the Superintendent on any successor test; and d) for a student in any of grades six to nine, has scored far below basic or below basic on the prior year's English language arts (ELA) test, or a score determined by the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) on any successor test.
3. Defines an ARLTEL as a student who is a) enrolled in any of grades 3 to 12; b) has been enrolled in schools in the United States for four to five years; c) has scored at the intermediate level or below on the prior year's English language development test, or a score determined by the SPI on any successor test, and d) for a student in any of grades three to nine, inclusive, has scored in the fourth or fifth year at the below basic or far below basic level on the prior year's ELA test, or a score determined by the SPI on any successor test.
4. Requires that the CDE annually ascertain and report the number of students who are LTELs and ARLTELs and to provide this information to districts and schools, and requires that each school district with English learners annually assess these students' English language development until they are redesignated as English proficient.
5. Establishes the California English Language Development Test (CELDT) and the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (ELPAC), which is currently in development.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

1. The CDE estimates one-time costs of $32,000 General Fund to develop a sample letter.
2. State reimbursable mandate costs potentially in the hundreds of thousands for school districts to provide the notification letter to parents or guardians of a student when the home language survey is provided, and to expand the information to be included in the parent notice of assessment of his or her child's English language proficiency. (Proposition 98)

COMMENTS:

Need for the bill. This bill is intended to provide parents important information on their children's status as English learners, and prevent students from being misclassified as English learners upon initial enrollment at a school. According to the author, while federal law requires parental notification of a student's English proficiency within 30 days of the start of school, no information is currently provided regarding students who are long term ELs or who are at risk of becoming long-term ELs. Additionally, the author is concerned that the home language survey does not provide parents with an understanding of the purpose of the survey and the procedures for identification and reclassification of ELs.

Who determines which students are LTELs and ARLTELs? The CDE currently provides LEAs reports on students they have determined meet the statutory definition of LTEL and ARLTEL. The CDE sends these reports in the spring, and makes the determination based on enrollment and assessment information they maintain.

Under this bill, it appears that an LEAs would have a choice: they could use the CDE report as the basis for the parent notification of LTEL/ARLTEL status, or they make the determination themselves using their own data. As demonstrated below, the decision has implications for the "currentness" of the information provided to parents.

The challenge of providing current information to parents under the current LTEL definition. The goal of providing parents with information about their students' progress learning English is certainly laudable, and is consistent with other parental notification currently required for English learners.

The challenge in providing parents information about LTEL/ARLTEL status is in ensuring that this information reflects the student's current status, which parents would reasonably expect. The difficulty in providing such information derives from the statutory definition of LTEL/ARLTEL, which uses prior year assessment data. This definition provides schools with important information for instructional planning, but cannot generate "point in time" information regarding students' status.

To understand which information would be used in the parent notification letter, it may be useful to imagine the case of an 8th grade English learner student who takes the CELDT or ELPAC (hereafter CELDT) the summer before or during the first few months of her 8th grade year, during the testing window of July 1 to October 31. As required by this bill, the parent notification letter regarding her status is sent during the first 30 days of her 8th grade school year.

1. CDE-determined LTEL/ARLTEL status: The LEA may choose to send the parent the notification based on the student's 7th grade CDE report. This student's 7th grade report includes CELDT data from the summers before her 5th grade and 6th grade years. If she has taken the CELDT in between the CDE's 7th grade report and the beginning of her 8th grade year, this information is not included in the determination of LTEL/ARLTEL status. Her 7th grade ELA scores also cannot be used, because statute requires that the report include data from the prior year (in this case, 6th grade). Even if the statute allows for current year ELA scores to be used, this student's 7th grade scores are not available when the CDE report is generated. If this student's CELDT scores improve in 6th, 7th, or 8th grade, or her ELA scores improved in her 7th grade year, she may not meet the criteria to be classified as an LTEL/ARLTEL at the beginning of 8th grade.
2. LEA-determined LTEL/ARLTEL status: The LEA may choose to make the determination of whether this 8th grade student is an LTEL/ARLTEL on its own. The LEA will require enrollment and assessment data to make this determination, and for unified districts this should not present a problem. If she has recently transferred, or has moved from an elementary to a high school district it is not clear if this information will be readily available. Assuming that it is, the LEA combines this information with CELDT scores from the summers before her 6th and 7th grade years. The LEA may use ELA scores from the 7th grade year, if those results are received in time. If this student's CELDT scores improved in 7th, or 8th grade, or her ELA scores improved in her 7th grade year, she may not meet the criteria to be classified as an LTEL/ARLTEL.

Whichever set of information parents are provided, the definition in current law means that some data which might alter the student's status will be excluded. If the parent notice were required to be sent in the spring of her 8^th grade year, LEAs could use the CDE report as the basis for their notifications. This would occur prior to the summer/fall administration of the CELDT, so the information would be more current. However, sending this notice in the fall, as required by this bill, would likely allow for the incorporation of more recent ELA scores.

One district, the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), already provides information to parents about their students' LTEL/ARLTEL status. LAUSD provides twice-annual notification to parents, followed by two parent-teacher conferences to review current language status,

program placement, test results, and goals for achieving reclassification, and accelerated academic progress targets. Notably, LAUSD does not use the state definition of LTEL, instead choosing to use a broader definition which does not include any assessment or other academic data. LAUSD bases its LTEL determination solely on the number of years the student has been an EL (using five years instead of six as the benchmark), and the grade level of the student (grade 6 or higher). This allows for more current information to be provided to parents, since a student's EL classification is revisited frequently.

Issue may need to be revisited as EL reclassification criteria and ELD assessment are in transition. Two elements of English learner policy which are related to LTEL/ARLTEL definitions are in transition, and may require that the issues in this bill be revisited.

The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) requires that states establish standardized, statewide exit procedures to reclassify ELs. Pending federal regulations to implement this requirement would prohibit the use of performance on an academic content measure as a criterion. In California this appears to mean the elimination of the use of the English language arts assessment as one of the four used in reclassification, and it is likely that it would also be removed from the state's definition of LTELs and ARLTELs as well.

The state's new ELPAC assessment, currently in development, will be fully implemented (initial and summative assessments) in the 2018-19 school year. ELPAC draft regulations, which CDE anticipates will be operative by July, 2017, require that parents be notified in writing of districts' plans to assess students. This may present an opportunity for parents to correct an error in the home language survey prior to the administration of the assessment. The ELPAC test window will also be shifted from summer/fall to winter/spring.

Correcting home language survey errors. This bill requires that parents be provided with a notice which informs them of their right to dispute school districts' determination of primary language, and to ask school districts to re-determine it. According to the CDE, districts do not actually determine the student's primary language. To more accurately reflect the process, the letter could inform parents of their right to correct errors on the home language survey.

GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE:

I am returning Assembly Bill 491 without my signature.

This bill would, among other things, require school districts to provide parents, at the time of enrolling their student, information explaining how their responses to a home language survey may lead to their student being designated as an English learner.

Given that English learners constitute approximately one-fourth of students enrolled in California public schools, I agree that we need to do a better job explaining to parents how their student may be designated as an English learner and what happens once they receive this designation. The specific statements included in this bill, however, are not clear and will cause more confusion for parents, not less.

This is an important matter that we have to get right.

Analysis Prepared by: Tanya Lieberman / ED. / (916) 319-2087 FN: 0005111

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA2 Bill Id:AB 491

Author:(Gonzalez)

As Amended Ver:August 19, 2016

Majority vote

(vote not relevant)

ED.

Original Committee Reference: ED.

SUMMARY: Requires that parents be annually informed if their children are long term English learners (LTELs) or at risk of becoming LTELs (ARLTELs), requires the California Department of Education (CDE) to develop a sample notification letter informing parents of their right to dispute school districts' determinations of primary language, and requires districts to provide the letter to parents at the time the home language survey is provided.

The Senate amendments delete the Assembly version of the bill, and instead:

1. Expand the existing parental notification requirements regarding the assessment of a student's English proficiency to contain information on:
2. whether the child is an LTEL or an ARLTEL
3. the manner in which the district's program for English language development (ELD) instruction will meet the educational strengths and needs of LTELSs or ARLTELs
4. the manner in which the program for ELD instruction will help LTELs and ARLTELs develop English proficiency and meet age-appropriate academic standards
5. Requires the CDE to make available to schools a sample notification letter and requires that it be provided with the home language survey used to determine the primary language of a student at the time of enrollment.
6. Requires that the notification letter explain the purpose of the home language survey and the procedures for classification and reclassification of English learners.
7. Requires the notification letter to include, but not be limited to, the following statements:
8. "If a language other than English is noted on your child's home language survey, the law requires us to test your child's English language proficiency."
9. "You may dispute the school district's determination of your child's primary language and ask the school district to redetermine your child's primary language."
10. "Once your child's English language proficiency is tested and your child is identified as an English learner, changing the home language survey will not change your child's identification as an English learner."

EXISTING LAW:

1. State law aligned to the (inoperative) federal No Child Left Behind act requires that a school district that receives federal funds for providing a language instruction education program for English Learners (ELs) to provide notice to a parent within 30 days of the start of the school year of specified information if their child has been identified for participation in the program.
2. Defines an LTEL as a student who is a) enrolled in any of grades 6 to 12; b) has been enrolled in schools in the United States for six years or more; c) has remained at the same English language proficiency level for two or more consecutive prior years, or has regressed to a lower English language proficiency level, as determined by the English language development test, or a score determined by the Superintendent on any successor test; and 4) for a student in any of grades six to nine, has scored far below basic or below basic on the prior year's English language arts (ELA) test, or a score determined by the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) on any successor test.
3. Defines an ARLTEL as a student who is 1) enrolled in any of grades 3 to 12; 2) has been enrolled in schools in the United States for four to five years; 3) has scored at the intermediate level or below on the prior year's English language development test, or a score determined by the SPI on any successor test, and 4) for a student in any of grades 3 to 9, inclusive, has scored in the fourth or fifth year at the below basic or far below basic level on the prior year's ELA test, or a score determined by the SPI on any successor test.
4. Requires that the CDE annually ascertain and report the number of students who are LTELs and ARLTELs and to provide this information to districts and schools, and requires that each school district with English learners annually assess these students' English language development until they are redesignated as English proficient.
5. Establishes the California English Language Development Test (CELDT) and the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (ELPAC), which is currently in development.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

1. The CDE estimates one-time costs of $32,000 General Fund to develop a sample letter.
2. State reimbursable mandate costs potentially in the hundreds of thousands for school districts to provide the notification letter to parents or guardians of a student when the home language survey is provided, and to expand the information to be included in the parent notice of assessment of his or her child's English language proficiency. (Proposition 98)

COMMENTS:

Need for the bill. This bill is intended to provide parents important information on their children's status as English learners, and prevent students from being misclassified as English learners upon initial enrollment at a school. According to the author, while federal law requires parental notification of a student's English proficiency within 30 days of the start of school, no information is currently provided regarding students who are long term ELs or who are at risk of becoming long-term ELs. Additionally, the author is concerned that the home language survey does not provide parents with an understanding of the purpose of the survey and the procedures for identification and reclassification of ELs.

Who determines which students are LTELs and ARLTELs? The CDE currently provides Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) reports on students they have determined meet the statutory definition of LTEL and ARLTEL. The CDE sends these reports in the spring, and makes the determination based on enrollment and assessment information they maintain.

Under this bill, it appears that a LEAs would have a choice: they could use the CDE report as the basis for the parent notification of LTEL/ARLTEL status, or they make the determination themselves using their own data. As demonstrated below, the decision has implications for the "currentness" of the information provided to parents.

The challenge of providing current information to parents under the current LTEL definition. The goal of providing parents with information about their students' progress learning English is certainly laudable, and is consistent with other parental notification currently required for English learners.

The challenge in providing parents information about LTEL/ARLTEL status is in ensuring that this information reflects the student's current status, which parents would reasonably expect. The difficulty in providing such information derives from the statutory definition of LTEL/ARLTEL, which uses prior year assessment data. This definition provides schools with important information for instructional planning, but cannot generate "point in time" information regarding students' status.

To understand which information would be used in the parent notification letter, it may be useful to imagine the case of an 8th grade English learner student who takes the CELDT or ELPAC (hereafter CELDT) the summer before or during the first few months of her 8th grade year, during the testing window of July 1 to October 31. As required by this bill, the parent notification letter regarding her status is sent during the first 30 days of her 8th grade school year.

1. CDE-determined LTEL/ARLTEL status: The LEA may choose to send the parent the notification based on the student's 7th grade CDE report. This student's 7th grade report includes CELDT data from the summers before her 5th grade and 6th grade years. If she has taken the CELDT in between the CDE's 7th grade report and the beginning of her 8th grade year, this information is not included in the determination of LTEL/ARLTEL status. Her 7th grade ELA scores also cannot be used, because statute requires that the report include data from the prior year (in this case, 6th grade). Even if the statute allows for current year ELA scores to be used, this student's 7th grade scores are not available when the CDE report is generated. If this student's CELDT scores improve in 6th, 7th, or 8th grade, or her ELA scores improved in her 7th grade year, she may not meet the criteria to be classified as an LTEL/ARLTEL at the beginning of 8th grade.
2. LEA-determined LTEL/ARLTEL status: The LEA may choose to make the determination of whether this 8th grade student is an LTEL/ARLTEL on its own. The LEA will require enrollment and assessment data to make this determination, and for unified districts this should not present a problem. If she has recently transferred, or has moved from an elementary to a high school district it is not clear if this information will be readily available. Assuming that it is, the LEA combines this information with CELDT scores from the summers before her 6th and 7th grade years. The LEA may use ELA scores from the 7th grade year, if those results are received in time. If this student's CELDT scores improved in 7th, or 8th grade, or her ELA scores improved in her 7th grade year, she may not meet the criteria to be classified as an LTEL/ARLTEL.

Whichever set of information parents are provided, the definition in current law means that some data which might alter the student's status will be excluded. If the parent notice were required to be sent in the spring of her 8th grade year, LEAs could use the CDE report as the basis for their notifications. This would occur prior to the summer/fall administration of the CELDT, so the information would be more current. However, sending this notice in the fall, as required by this bill, would likely allow for the incorporation of more recent ELA scores.

One district, the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), already provides information to parents about their students' LTEL/ARLTEL status. LAUSD provides twice-annual notification to parents, followed by two parent-teacher conferences to review current language status,

program placement, test results, and goals for achieving reclassification, and accelerated academic progress targets. Notably, LAUSD does not use the state definition of LTEL, instead choosing to use a broader definition which does not include any assessment or other academic data. LAUSD bases its LTEL determination solely on the number of years the student has been an EL (using five years instead of six as the benchmark), and the grade level of the student (grade six or higher). This allows for more current information to be provided to parents, since a student's EL classification is revisited frequently.

Issue may need to be revisited as EL reclassification criteria and ELD assessment are in transition. Two elements of English learner policy which are related to LTEL/ARLTEL definitions are in transition, and may require that the issues in this bill be revisited.

The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) requires that states establish standardized, statewide exit procedures to reclassify ELs. Pending federal regulations to implement this requirement would prohibit the use of performance on an academic content measure as a criterion. In California this appears to mean the elimination of the use of the English language arts assessment as one of the four used in reclassification, and it is likely that it would also be removed from the state's definition of LTELs and ARLTELs as well.

The state's new ELPAC assessment, currently in development, will be fully implemented (initial and summative assessments) in the 2018-19 school year. ELPAC draft regulations, which CDE anticipates will be operative by July, 2017, require that parents be notified in writing of districts' plans to assess students. This may present an opportunity for parents to correct an error in the home language survey prior to the administration of the assessment. The ELPAC test window will also be shifted from summer/fall to winter/spring.

Correcting home language survey errors. This bill requires that parents be provided with a notice which informs them of their right to dispute school districts' determination of primary language, and to ask school districts to re-determine it. According to the CDE, districts do not actually determine the student's primary language. To more accurately reflect the process, the letter could inform parents of their right to correct errors on the home language survey.

Analysis Prepared by: Tanya Lieberman / ED. / (916) 319-2087 FN: 0005014

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 491

Author:(Gonzalez)

As Amended Ver:August 19, 2016

Majority vote

Original Committee Reference: ED.

SUMMARY: Requires that parents be annually informed if their children are long term English learners (LTELs) or at risk of becoming LTELs (ARLTELs), requires the California Department of Education (CDE) to develop a sample notification letter informing parents of their right to dispute school districts' determinations of primary language, and requires districts to provide the letter to parents at the time the home language survey is provided.

The Senate amendments delete the Assembly version of the bill, and instead:

1. Expand the existing parental notification requirements regarding the assessment of a student's English proficiency to contain information on:
2. whether the child is an LTEL or an ARLTEL
3. the manner in which the district's program for English language development (ELD) instruction will meet the educational strengths and needs of LTELSs or ARLTELs
4. the manner in which the program for ELD instruction will help LTELs and ARLTELs develop English proficiency and meet age-appropriate academic standards
5. Require the CDE to make available to schools a sample notification letter and requires that it be provided with the home language survey used to determine the primary language of a student at the time of enrollment.
6. Require that the notification letter explain the purpose of the home language survey and the procedures for classification and reclassification of English learners.
7. Require the notification letter to include, but not be limited to, the following statements:
8. "If a language other than English is noted on your child's home language survey, the law requires us to test your child's English language proficiency."
9. "You may dispute the school district's determination of your child's primary language and ask the school district to redetermine your child's primary language."
10. "Once your child's English language proficiency is tested and your child is identified as an English learner, changing the home language survey will not change your child's identification as an English learner."

EXISTING LAW:

1. State law aligned to the (inoperative) federal No Child Left Behind act requires that a school district that receives federal funds for providing a language instruction education program for ELs to provide notice to a parent within 30 days of the start of the school year of specified information if their child has been identified for participation in the program.
2. Defines an LTEL as a student who is a) enrolled in any of grades 6 to 12; b) has been enrolled in schools in the United States for six years or more; c) has remained at the same English language proficiency level for two or more consecutive prior years, or has regressed to a lower English language proficiency level, as determined by the English language development test, or a score determined by the Superintendent on any successor test; and d) for a student in any of grades 6 to 9, has scored far below basic or below basic on the prior year's English language arts (ELA) test, or a score determined by the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) on any successor test.
3. Defines an ARLTEL as a student who is a) enrolled in any of grades 3 to 12; b) has been enrolled in schools in the United States for four to five years; c) has scored at the intermediate level or below on the prior year's English language development test, or a score determined by the SPI on any successor test, and d) for a student in any of grades 3 to 9, inclusive, has scored in the fourth or fifth year at the below basic or far below basic level on the prior year's ELA test, or a score determined by the SPI on any successor test.
4. Requires that the CDE annually ascertain and report the number of students who are LTELs and ARLTELs and to provide this information to districts and schools, and requires that each school district with English learners annually assess these students' English language development until they are redesignated as English proficient.
5. Establishes the California English Language Development Test (CELDT) and the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (ELPAC), which is currently in development.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

1. The CDE estimates one-time costs of $32,000 General Fund to develop a sample letter.
2. State reimbursable mandate costs potentially in the hundreds of thousands for school districts to provide the notification letter to parents or guardians of a student when the home language survey is provided, and to expand the information to be included in the parent notice of assessment of his or her child's English language proficiency. (Proposition 98)

COMMENTS:

Need for the bill. This bill is intended to provide parents important information on their children's status as English learners, and prevent students from being misclassified as English learners upon initial enrollment at a school. According to the author, while federal law requires parental notification of a student's English proficiency within 30 days of the start of school, no information is currently provided regarding students who are long term ELs or who are at risk of becoming long-term ELs. Additionally, the author is concerned that the home language survey does not provide parents with an understanding of the purpose of the survey and the procedures for identification and reclassification of ELs.

Who determines which students are LTELs and ARLTELs? The CDE currently provides LEAs reports on students they have determined meet the statutory definition of LTEL and ARLTEL. The CDE sends these reports in the spring, and makes the determination based on enrollment and assessment information they maintain.

Under this bill, it appears that LEAs would have a choice: they could use the CDE report as the basis for the parent notification of LTEL/ARLTEL status, or they make the determination themselves using their own data. As demonstrated below, the decision has implications for the "currentness" of the information provided to parents.

The challenge of providing current information to parents under the current LTEL definition. The goal of providing parents with information about their students' progress learning English is certainly laudable, and is consistent with other parental notification currently required for English learners.

The challenge in providing parents information about LTEL/ARLTEL status is in ensuring that this information reflects the student's current status, which parents would reasonably expect. The difficulty in providing such information derives from the statutory definition of LTEL/ARLTEL, which uses prior year assessment data. This definition provides schools with important information for instructional planning, but cannot generate "point in time" information regarding students' status.

To understand which information would be used in the parent notification letter, it may be useful to imagine the case of an 8th grade English learner student who takes the CELDT or ELPAC (hereafter CELDT) the summer before or during the first few months of her 8th grade year, during the testing window of July 1 to October 31. As required by this bill, the parent notification letter regarding her status is sent during the first 30 days of her 8th grade school year.

1. CDE-determined LTEL/ARLTEL status: The LEA may choose to send the parent the notification based on the student's 7th grade CDE report. This student's 7th grade report includes CELDT data from the summers before her 5th grade and 6th grade years. If she has taken the CELDT in between the CDE's 7th grade report and the beginning of her 8th grade year, this information is not included in the determination of LTEL/ARLTEL status. Her 7th grade ELA scores also cannot be used, because statute requires that the report include data from the prior year (in this case, 6th grade). Even if the statute allows for current year ELA scores to be used, this student's 7th grade scores are not available when the CDE report is generated. If this student's CELDT scores improve in 6th, 7th, or 8th grade, or her ELA scores improved in her 7th grade year, she may not meet the criteria to be classified as an LTEL/ARLTEL at the beginning of 8th grade.
2. LEA-determined LTEL/ARLTEL status: The LEA may choose to make the determination of whether this 8th grade student is an LTEL/ARLTEL on its own. The LEA will require enrollment and assessment data to make this determination, and for unified districts this should not present a problem. If she has recently transferred, or has moved from an elementary to a high school district it is not clear if this information will be readily available. Assuming that it is, the LEA combines this information with CELDT scores from the summers before her 6th and 7th grade years. The LEA may use ELA scores from the 7th grade year, if those results are received in time. If this student's CELDT scores improved in 7th, or 8th grade, or her ELA scores improved in her 7th grade year, she may not meet the criteria to be classified as an LTEL/ARLTEL.

Whichever set of information parents are provided, the definition in current law means that some data which might alter the student's status will be excluded. If the parent notice were required to be sent in the spring of her 8th grade year, LEAs could use the CDE report as the basis for their notifications. This would occur prior to the summer/fall administration of the CELDT, so the information would be more current. However, sending this notice in the fall, as required by this bill, would likely allow for the incorporation of more recent ELA scores.

One district, the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), already provides information to parents about their students' LTEL/ARLTEL status. LAUSD provides twice-annual notification to parents, followed by two parent-teacher conferences to review current language status,

program placement, test results, and goals for achieving reclassification, and accelerated academic progress targets. Notably, LAUSD does not use the state definition of LTEL, instead choosing to use a broader definition which does not include any assessment or other academic data. LAUSD bases its LTEL determination solely on the number of years the student has been an EL (using five years instead of six as the benchmark), and the grade level of the student (grade 6 or higher). This allows for more current information to be provided to parents, since a student's EL classification is revisited frequently.

Issue may need to be revisited as EL reclassification criteria and ELD assessment are in transition. Two elements of English learner policy which are related to LTEL/ARLTEL definitions are in transition, and may require that the issues in this bill be revisited.

The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) requires that states establish standardized, statewide exit procedures to reclassify ELs. Pending federal regulations to implement this requirement would prohibit the use of performance on an academic content measure as a criterion. In California this appears to mean the elimination of the use of the English language arts assessment as one of the four used in reclassification, and it is likely that it would also be removed from the state's definition of LTELs and ARLTELs as well.

The state's new ELPAC assessment, currently in development, will be fully implemented (initial and summative assessments) in the 2018-19 school year. ELPAC draft regulations, which CDE anticipates will be operative by July, 2017, require that parents be notified in writing of districts' plans to assess students. This may present an opportunity for parents to correct an error in the home language survey prior to the administration of the assessment. The ELPAC test window will also be shifted from summer/fall to winter/spring.

Correcting home language survey errors. This bill requires that parents be provided with a notice which informs them of their right to dispute school districts' determination of primary language, and to ask school districts to re-determine it. According to the CDE, districts do not actually determine the student's primary language. To more accurately reflect the process, the letter could inform parents of their right to correct errors on the home language survey.

Analysis Prepared by: Tanya Lieberman / ED. / (916) 319-2087 FN: 0004944

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 491

Author:

: 8/19/16

Vote:

SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 9-0, 6/15/16

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

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

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

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

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill expands parental notification requirements relative to long-term English learners (EL), requires the California Department of Education (CDE) to develop a sample notification letter disclosing the use of the results of the home language survey used to determine the primary language of a student upon enrollment, and requires districts to provide the letter to parents at the time the home language survey is provided.

Senate Floor Amendments of 8/19/16 delete reference to an outdated Education Code section.

ANALYSIS:

Existing federal law requires that a school district that receives federal funds for providing a language instruction education program for limited English proficient students to provide notice to a parent within 30 days of the start of the school year of specified information if their child has been identified for participation in the program. In addition, state law requires that, in conformance with these provisions, that the notice include specified information. (Title 20, § 7012, USC)

Existing state law:

1. Defines a long-term EL and a student at risk of becoming a long-term English learner. (Education Code § 313.1)
2. Requires that the CDE annually ascertain and report the number of students who are, or are at risk of becoming, long-term English learners and to provide this information to districts and schools. (EC § 313.2)
3. Requires the determination of a student’s primary language upon enrollment and assessment of the language skills of all students whose primary language is other than English. (EC § 52164.1)
4. Requires, under federal and state law, that each school district with English language learners annually assess these students' English language development until they are redesignated as English proficient. (EC § 313)

This bill:

1. Expands parental notification requirements regarding the assessment of a student’s English language proficiency to additionally contain the following information:
   1. Whether the child is a long-term EL or at risk of becoming a long-term EL.
   2. The manner in which the English language development instruction will:
      1. Meet the long-term EL or at risk of becoming a long-term EL educational strengths and needs.
      2. Help the EL or at risk of becoming a long-term EL develop English proficiency and meet age-appropriate academic standards.
2. Requires the CDE to develop and make available a sample notification letter explaining the purposes of the home language survey letter and the procedures for identification and reclassification of ELs. Additionally, it:
   1. Requires that the notification letter include specified statements advising parents how they can dispute the school’s determination.
   2. Requires that districts provide the notification letter to the parent/guardian at the same time the home language survey is provided.

Comments

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, while federal law requires parental notification of a student’s English proficiency within 30 days of the start of school, no information is currently provided regarding students who are long term ELs or who are at risk of becoming long-term ELs. Additionally, the author is concerned that the home language survey required under sunset California law does not provide parents with an understanding of the purpose of the survey and the procedures for identification and reclassification of ELs. This bill is intended to prevent students from being misclassified upon initial enrollment at a school.
2. Long-term English Learners. A 2010 report by Californians Together, Reparable Harm: Fulfilling the Unkept Promise of Educational Opportunity for California’s Long-Term English Learners, presented survey data collected from 40 school districts. Major findings of the survey included the following:
   1. The majority (59%) of secondary school ELs are “Long-Term English Learners (defined as being in US schools for more than six years without sufficient English proficiency to be reclassified).
   2. California school districts that do not have a shared definition of Long-term ELs.
   3. Several contributing factors include; no receipt of language development programs, being given elementary school curricula and materials that were not designed to meet EL needs, weak language development program models, inconsistent programs, social and linguistic isolation and other things.
   4. Few districts have designated programs or formal approaches designed for Long-Term ELs.

As a result of this report, legislation was enacted (AB 2193, Lara, Chapter 427, Statutes of 2012) to statutorily define “long-term English learner” and “at risk of becoming a long-term English learner” and to require that the CDE ascertain and provide the number of students who meet these definitions to districts and schools.

This bill requires that existing notification requirements regarding the assessment of a student’s English language proficiency include specific information for students identified as a long-term EL or at risk of becoming a long-term EL.

1. Home Language Survey. Existing law requires schools to determine the language(s) spoken in the home of each student. This determination begins with a home language survey (HLS), which is completed by the parents or guardians at the time the student is first enrolled. The CDE provides a sample form, available in various languages to assist with this identification process.

According to the CDE, a redetermination of a primary language is only required if the results are disputed by a parent or guardian. If a language other than English was inaccurately included on the HLS, a parent/guardian may request to update the HLS to accurately reflect the language(s) spoken in the home. However, if a pupil has already completed a California English Language Development Test (CELDT) and has been designated an English learner, the pupil must take the assessment annually until they are reclassified fluent English proficient.

This bill is intended to respond to concerns that the current home language survey process “misidentifies” students as ELs and makes it difficult to correct any “misidentifications”. The bill requires that the home language survey information include disclosures regarding the purpose of the home language survey, the ability of a parent to dispute the determination, and the inability to make any changes once the child has been tested and identified as an EL.

1. Are there issues? In March 2013, in response to concerns regarding inaccurate identification of ELs, CDE gathered suggestions for possible HLS revisions from the statewide Bilingual Coordinators’ Network of district and county professionals. In September 2013, the CDE participated in a national working session with several states, stakeholders, and researchers convened by the Council of Chief State School Officers aimed at strengthening the reliability, accuracy, and usefulness of HLS questions and processes. In February and May of 2014, the CDE met with representatives from five local educational agencies, researchers, and other stakeholders to review the current HLS and make recommendations for revising the tool. From these meetings, the workgroup developed survey questions to be used in an HLS Pilot Study conducted by the West Ed Regional Education Laboratory-West and California Comprehensive Center in collaboration with the University of California Los Angeles Graduate School of Education & Information Studies.

The HLS Pilot Study examined the clarity of the HLS (questions and the extent to which these may better predict which students are potential ELs and need to be assessed. Approximately 20 schools participated in the study from five participating districts including ABC Unified School District, Coachella Valley Unified School District, Inglewood Unified School District, Robla Elementary School District, and Torrance Unified School District.

According to the CDE, because the sample size was limited to 150 students, the results of the pilot study do not yield sufficient information to recommend policy decisions. The CDE recommended a more extensive and systematic study be conducted at a later date when the English Learner Proficiency Assessment is operational.

1. English learners. The CDE provides the following information on English learners in California's public schools:
   1. In the 2014-15 school year there were approximately 1.4 million ELs in California public schools, constituting 22.3 percent of the total enrollment.
   2. Over 2.6 million students (42.9 percent of public school enrollment) spoke a language other than English in their home.
   3. 73 percent of ELs are enrolled in the elementary grades (K-6) with the remaining 27 percent enrolled in grades 7-12.
   4. Although EL data is collected for 60 language groups, 94 percent speak one of the top ten languages in the state, which include Spanish (83.7 percent), Vietnamese, Pilipino (Filipino or Tagalog), Cantonese, Mandarin, Arabic, Hmong, Korean, Punjabi, and Russian.
   5. During 2013-14 the CDE administered the CELDT) to 1.4 million students, 1.1 million of whom were tested under the annual assessment window.
   6. In 2012-13 and 2013-14, approximately 12 percent of ELs were reclassified as English proficient. Prior to that approximately 11 percent of English learners were annually reclassified, with the notable exception that in 2011-12, 16.3 percent were reclassified.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

According to the Senate Committee on Appropriation, this bill would impose the following costs:

• The CDE estimates one-time costs of $32,000 General Fund to develop a sample notification letter.
• State reimbursable mandate costs potentially in the hundreds of thousands for school districts to provide the notification letter to parents or guardians of a student when the home language survey is provided, and to expand the information to be included in the parent notice of assessment of his or her child’s English language proficiency. (Proposition 98)

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/22/16)

Association of California School Administrators

Los Angeles Unified School District

San Diego Unified School District

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/22/16)

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:

8/22/16 20:38:05

**** END ****

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 491

Author:

: 8/15/16

Vote:

SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 9-0, 6/15/16

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

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

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

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

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill expands parental notification requirements relative to long-term English learners (EL), requires the California Department of Education (CDE) to develop a sample notification letter disclosing the use of the results of the home language survey used to determine the primary language of a student upon enrollment, and requires districts to provide the letter to parents at the time the home language survey is provided.

ANALYSIS:

Existing federal law requires that a school district that receives federal funds for providing a language instruction education program for limited English proficient students to provide notice to a parent within 30 days of the start of the school year of specified information if their child has been identified for participation in the program. In addition, state law requires that, in conformance with these provisions, that the notice include specified information. (Title 20, § 7012, USC)

Existing state law:

1. Defines a long-term EL and a student at risk of becoming a long-term English learner. (Education Code § 313.1)
2. Requires that the CDE annually ascertain and report the number of students who are, or are at risk of becoming, long-term English learners and to provide this information to districts and schools. (EC § 313.2)
3. Requires the determination of a student’s primary language upon enrollment and assessment of the language skills of all students whose primary language is other than English. (EC § 52164.1)
4. Requires, under federal and state law, that each school district with English language learners annually assess these students' English language development until they are redesignated as English proficient. (EC § 313)

This bill:

1. Expands parental notification requirements regarding the assessment of a student’s English language proficiency to additionally contain the following information:
   1. Whether the child is a long-term EL or at risk of becoming a long-term EL.
   2. The manner in which the English language development instruction will:
      1. Meet the long-term EL or at risk of becoming a long-term EL educational strengths and needs.
      2. Help the EL or at risk of becoming a long-term EL develop English proficiency and meet age-appropriate academic standards.
2. Requires the CDE to develop and make available a sample notification letter explaining the purposes of the home language survey letter and the procedures for identification and reclassification of ELs. Additionally, it:
   1. Requires that the notification letter include specified statements advising parents how they can dispute the school’s determination.
   2. Requires that districts provide the notification letter to the parent/guardian at the same time the home language survey is provided.

Comments

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, while federal law requires parental notification of a student’s English proficiency within 30 days of the start of school, no information is currently provided regarding students who are long term ELs or who are at risk of becoming long-term ELs. Additionally, the author is concerned that the home language survey required under sunset California law does not provide parents with an understanding of the purpose of the survey and the procedures for identification and reclassification of ELs. This bill is intended to prevent students from being misclassified upon initial enrollment at a school.
2. Long-term English Learners. A 2010 report by Californians Together, Reparable Harm: Fulfilling the Unkept Promise of Educational Opportunity for California’s Long-Term English Learners, presented survey data collected from 40 school districts. Major findings of the survey included the following:
   1. The majority (59%) of secondary school ELs are “Long-Term English Learners (defined as being in US schools for more than six years without sufficient English proficiency to be reclassified).
   2. California school districts that do not have a shared definition of Long-term ELs.
   3. Several contributing factors include; no receipt of language development programs, being given elementary school curricula and materials that were not designed to meet EL needs, weak language development program models, inconsistent programs, social and linguistic isolation and other things.
   4. Few districts have designated programs or formal approaches designed for Long-Term ELs.

As a result of this report, legislation was enacted (AB 2193, Lara, Chapter 427, Statutes of 2012) to statutorily define “long-term English learner” and “at risk of becoming a long-term English learner” and to require that the CDE ascertain and provide the number of students who meet these definitions to districts and schools.

This bill requires that existing notification requirements regarding the assessment of a student’s English language proficiency include specific information for students identified as a long-term EL or at risk of becoming a long-term EL.

1. Home Language Survey. Existing law requires schools to determine the language(s) spoken in the home of each student. This determination begins with a home language survey (HLS), which is completed by the parents or guardians at the time the student is first enrolled. The CDE provides a sample form, available in various languages to assist with this identification process.

According to the CDE, a redetermination of a primary language is only required if the results are disputed by a parent or guardian. If a language other than English was inaccurately included on the HLS, a parent/guardian may request to update the HLS to accurately reflect the language(s) spoken in the home. However, if a pupil has already completed a California English Language Development Test (CELDT) and has been designated an English learner, the pupil must take the assessment annually until they are reclassified fluent English proficient.

This bill is intended to respond to concerns that the current home language survey process “misidentifies” students as ELs and makes it difficult to correct any “misidentifications”. The bill requires that the home language survey information include disclosures regarding the purpose of the home language survey, the ability of a parent to dispute the determination, and the inability to make any changes once the child has been tested and identified as an EL.

1. Are there issues? In March 2013, in response to concerns regarding inaccurate identification of ELs, CDE gathered suggestions for possible HLS revisions from the statewide Bilingual Coordinators’ Network of district and county professionals. In September 2013, the CDE participated in a national working session with several states, stakeholders, and researchers convened by the Council of Chief State School Officers aimed at strengthening the reliability, accuracy, and usefulness of HLS questions and processes. In February and May of 2014, the CDE met with representatives from five local educational agencies, researchers, and other stakeholders to review the current HLS and make recommendations for revising the tool. From these meetings, the workgroup developed survey questions to be used in an HLS Pilot Study conducted by the West Ed Regional Education Laboratory-West and California Comprehensive Center in collaboration with the University of California Los Angeles Graduate School of Education & Information Studies.

The HLS Pilot Study examined the clarity of the HLS (questions and the extent to which these may better predict which students are potential ELs and need to be assessed. Approximately 20 schools participated in the study from five participating districts including ABC Unified School District, Coachella Valley Unified School District, Inglewood Unified School District, Robla Elementary School District, and Torrance Unified School District.

According to the CDE, because the sample size was limited to 150 students, the results of the pilot study do not yield sufficient information to recommend policy decisions. The CDE recommended a more extensive and systematic study be conducted at a later date when the English Learner Proficiency Assessment is operational.

1. English learners. The CDE provides the following information on English learners in California's public schools:
   1. In the 2014-15 school year there were approximately 1.4 million ELs in California public schools, constituting 22.3 percent of the total enrollment.
   2. Over 2.6 million students (42.9 percent of public school enrollment) spoke a language other than English in their home.
   3. 73 percent of ELs are enrolled in the elementary grades (K-6) with the remaining 27 percent enrolled in grades 7-12.
   4. Although EL data is collected for 60 language groups, 94 percent speak one of the top ten languages in the state, which include Spanish (83.7 percent), Vietnamese, Pilipino (Filipino or Tagalog), Cantonese, Mandarin, Arabic, Hmong, Korean, Punjabi, and Russian.
   5. During 2013-14 the CDE administered the CELDT) to 1.4 million students, 1.1 million of whom were tested under the annual assessment window.
   6. In 2012-13 and 2013-14, approximately 12 percent of ELs were reclassified as English proficient. Prior to that approximately 11 percent of English learners were annually reclassified, with the notable exception that in 2011-12, 16.3 percent were reclassified.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

According to the Senate Committee on Appropriation, this bill would impose the following costs:

• The CDE estimates one-time costs of $32,000 General Fund to develop a sample notification letter.
• State reimbursable mandate costs potentially in the hundreds of thousands for school districts to provide the notification letter to parents or guardians of a student when the home language survey is provided, and to expand the information to be included in the parent notice of assessment of his or her child’s English language proficiency. (Proposition 98)

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/12/16)

Association of California School Administrators

Los Angeles Unified School District

San Diego Unified School District

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/12/16)

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:

8/15/16 20:01:53

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular Session

AB 491 (Gonzalez) - English learners: identification: notice

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

The following information is revised to reflect amendments

adopted by the committee on August 11, 2016

Bill Summary:

This bill expands parental notification requirements relative to long-term English learners; requires the California Department of Education (CDE) to develop a sample notification letter disclosing the use of the results of the home language survey which determines the primary language of a student upon enrollment; and requires districts to provide the letter to parents at the time the home language survey is provided.

Fiscal Impact:

• The CDE estimates one-time costs of $32,000 General Fund to develop a sample notification letter.
• State reimbursable mandate costs potentially in the hundreds of thousands for school districts to provide the notification letter to parents or guardians of a student when the home language survey is provided, and to expand the information to be included in the parent notice of assessment of his or her child’s English language proficiency. (Proposition 98)

Author Amendments:

Clarifies the intent of this bill is not to require testing of a student’s primary language proficiency.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular Session

AB 491 (Gonzalez) - English learners: identification: notice

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

Bill Summary:

This bill expands parental notification requirements relative to long-term English learners; requires the California Department of Education (CDE) to develop a sample notification letter disclosing the use of the results of the home language survey which determines the primary language of a student upon enrollment; and requires districts to provide the letter to parents at the time the home language survey is provided.

Fiscal Impact:

• The CDE estimates one-time costs of $32,000 General Fund to develop a sample notification letter.
• State reimbursable mandate costs potentially in the hundreds of thousands for school districts to provide the notification letter to parents or guardians of a student when the home language survey is provided, and to expand the information to be included in the parent notice of assessment of his or her child’s English language proficiency. See staff comments. (Proposition 98)
• Potential significant cost pressure to create an assessment to measure a child’s proficiency in his or her primary language. To the extent the intent of this bill is to require such an assessment, administrative costs to the CDE would be about $308,000 General Fund for two additional positions to contract out for the development of the new assessment would cost around $21.5 million over multiple years (Proposition 98 funds). Actual costs would likely change from this estimate once a contractor is chosen and assessment development activities get underway. Additional costs would be incurred by local educational agencies to administer the assessment. See staff comments.

Background:

Existing law requires the determination of a student’s primary language upon enrollment and assessment of the language skills of all students whose primary language is other than English. (Education Code § 52164.1)

Federal law requires a school district that receives federal funds for providing a language instruction education program for limited English proficient students to provide notice to a parent within 30 days of the start of the school year of specified information if their child has been identified for participation in the program. In addition, state law requires that, in conformance with these provisions, the notice include specified information. (Title 20, § 7012, USC)

Both federal and state law require that each school district with English language learners annually assess these students' English language development until they are redesignated as English proficient. (EC § 313)

This bill is intended to respond to concerns that the current home language survey process “misidentifies” students as English learners and makes it difficult to correct any “misidentifications”. According to the CDE, pending regulations create a corrective action process that, if adopted, would allow for a change in a child’s English learner identification. Also, according to the author, no information is currently provided in the parental notification of a student’s English proficiency regarding students who are long-term English learners or at risk of becoming one.

Proposed Law:

This bill requires that in addition to the information already required to be included in the notice of assessment of a child’s English proficiency, a public school is also required to include:

• Whether the child is, or is at-risk of becoming, a long-term English learner.
• The manner in which the program for English language development instruction will meet the educational strengths and needs of those at risk of becoming, or those who are, long-term English learners and the manner in which the program will help them develop English proficiency and meet age-appropriate academic standards.

This bill also requires the CDE to make a sample notification letter available to public schools that is required to be provided with the home language survey used to determine the primary language of the student at the time of enrollment. The notification letter must explain the purpose of the home language survey and the procedures for identification and reclassification of English learners.

The notification must include, but is not limited to, the following statements:

• “If a language other than English is noted on your child’s home language survey, the law requires us to test your child’s English and primary language proficiency.”
• “If there is a mistake in completing the home language survey, you may dispute the school district’s determination of your child’s primary language and ask the school district to redetermine your child’s primary language. (Education Code Section 52164.1.)”
• “Once your child’s English and primary language proficiency is tested and your child is identified as an English learner, changing the home language survey will not change your child’s identification as an English learner.”

Staff Comments:

This bill requires the CDE to include certain statements on the sample notification letter to parents. Two statements assert that existing law requires the local educational agencies to test a child’s primary language proficiency if a language other than English is noted on the home language survey. However, existing law only applies to testing a child’s proficiency in English, not in their primary language. It is unclear whether it is the intent of this bill is to require additional testing in the child’s primary language. If this is the case, significant costs would be required to contract out for the development of such assessment and administer the assessment at the state and local level.

This bill makes modifications to the required contents of the parent notice of assessment of his or her child’s English language proficiency. It requires greater specificity by requiring information on how long-term English learners or those at risk of becoming long-term English learners, in particular, will benefit from the program for English language development instruction. This requirement may be deemed consistent within the existing structure of federal law. However, this bill also requires that the notification include information on whether the child is a long-term English learner or at risk of becoming one. This requirement may be deemed a state reimbursable mandate as it does not appear to be a federal requirement, resulting in likely minor state reimbursable costs. This notice would go out to all parents of roughly 1.4 million designated English learner students in the state.

This bill also requires each school district to provide the notification letter developed by the CDE to the parents or guardians of a student at the time the home language survey is provided. This notice would go out to all parents of roughly 6 million public school students in the state. Based on uniform costs developed by the Commission on State Mandates for the existing annual parent notification mandate, potential reimbursable costs related to the parent notifications in this bill could reach around $600,000 statewide.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Senator Carol Liu, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Bill No:

Subject:

SUMMARY

This bill expands parental notification requirements relative to long-term English learners, requires the California Department of Education (CDE) to develop a sample notification letter disclosing the use of the results of the home language survey used to determine the primary language of a student upon enrollment, and requires districts to provide the letter to parents at the time the home language survey is provided.

BACKGROUND

Existing law defines a long-term English learner and a student at risk of becoming a long-term English learner. (Education Code § 313.1)

Existing law requires that the CDE annually ascertain and report the number of students who are, or are at risk of becoming, long-term English learners and to provide this information to districts and schools. (EC § 313.2)

Existing law requires the determination of a student’s primary language upon enrollment and assessment of the language skills of all students whose primary language is other than English. (EC § 52164.1)

Federal law requires that a school district that receives federal funds for providing a language instruction education program for limited English proficient students to provide notice to a parent within 30 days of the start of the school year of specified information if their child has been identified for participation in the program. In addition, state law requires that, in conformance with these provisions, that the notice include specified information. (Title 20, § 7012, USC)

Both federal and State law require that each school district with English language learners annually assess these students' English language development until they are redesignated as English proficient. (EC § 313)

ANALYSIS

This bill:

1. Expands parental notification requirements regarding the assessment of a student’s English language proficiency to additionally contain the following information:
   1. Whether the child is a long-term English learner (EL) or at risk of

becoming a long-term EL.

• 1. The manner in which the English language development instruction will:
     1. Meet the long-term EL or at risk of becoming a long-term EL educational strengths and needs.
     2. Help the EL or at risk of becoming a long-term EL develop English proficiency and meet age-appropriate academic standards.

1. Requires the California Department of Education to develop and make available a sample notification letter explaining the purposes of the home language survey letter and the procedures for identification and reclassification of ELs. Additionally, it:
   1. Requires that the notification letter include specified statements advising parents how they can dispute the school’s determination.
   2. Requires that districts provide the notification letter to parents/guardians at the same time the home language survey is provided.
2. Updates federal law cross references and makes other technical changes.

STAFF COMMENTS

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, while federal law requires parental notification of a student’s English proficiency within 30 days of the start of school, no information is currently provided regarding students who are long term ELs or who are at risk of becoming long-term ELs. Additionally, the author is concerned that the home language survey required under sunset California law does not provide parents with an understanding of the purpose of the survey and the procedures for identification and reclassification of ELs. This bill is intended to prevent students from being misclassified upon initial enrollment at a school.
2. Long-term English Learners. A 2010 report by Californians Together, Reparable Harm: Fulfilling the Unkept Promise of Educational Opportunity for California’s Long-Term English Learners, presented survey data collected from 40 school districts. Major findings of the survey included the following:

a) The majority (59%) of secondary school English learners (EL) are “Long-Term English Learners (defined as being in US schools for more than six years without sufficient English proficiency to be reclassified).

b) California school districts that do not have a shared definition of Long-term English learners.

c) Several contributing factors include; no receipt of language development programs, being given elementary school curricula and materials that were not designed to meet EL needs, weak language development program models, inconsistent programs, social and linguistic isolation and other things.

d) Few districts have designated programs or formal approaches designed for Long-Term English Learners.

As a result of this report, legislation was enacted (AB 2193, Chapter 427, Statutes of 2012) to statutorily define “long-term English learner” and “at risk of becoming a long-term English learner” and to require that the California Department Education (CDE) ascertain and provide the number of students who meet these definitions to districts and schools.

This bill would require that existing notification requirements regarding the assessment of a student’s English language proficiency include specific information for students identified as a long-term EL or at risk of becoming a long-term EL.

1. Home Language Survey. Current law requires schools to determine the language(s) spoken in the home of each student. This determination begins with a home language survey (HLS), which is completed by the parents or guardians at the time the student is first enrolled. The CDE provides a sample form, available in various languages to assist with this identification process.

According to the CDE, a redetermination of a primary language is only required if the results are disputed by a parent or guardian. If a language other than English was inaccurately included on the HLS, a parent/guardian may request to update the HLS to accurately reflect the language(s) spoken in the home. However, if a pupil has already completed a California English Language Development Test (CELDT) and has been designated an English learner, the pupil must take the assessment annually until they are reclassified fluent English proficient.

This bill is intended to respond to concerns that the current home language survey process “misidentifies” students as English learners and makes it difficult to correct any “misidentifications”. The bill would require that the home language survey information include disclosures regarding the purpose of the home language survey, the ability of a parent to dispute the determination, and the inability to make any changes once the child has been tested and identified as an English learner.

1. Are there issues? In March 2013, in response to concerns regarding inaccurate identification of English learners (ELs), California Department of Education (CDE) gathered suggestions for possible home language survey (HLS) revisions from the statewide Bilingual Coordinators’ Network of district and county professionals. In September 2013, the CDE participated in a national working session with several states, stakeholders, and researchers convened by the Council of Chief State School Officers aimed at strengthening the reliability, accuracy, and usefulness of HLS questions and processes. In February and May of 2014, the CDE met with representatives from five local educational agencies, researchers, and other stakeholders to review the current HLS and make recommendations for revising the tool. From these meetings, the workgroup developed survey questions to be used in an HLS Pilot Study conducted by the West Ed Regional Education Laboratory-West and California Comprehensive Center in collaboration with the University of California Los Angeles Graduate School of Education & Information Studies.

The HLS Pilot Study examined the clarity of the HLS (questions and the extent to which these may better predict which students are potential ELs and need to be assessed. Approximately 20 schools participated in the study from five participating districts including ABC Unified School District, Coachella Valley Unified School District, Inglewood Unified School District, Robla Elementary School District, and Torrance Unified School District.

According to the CDE, because the sample size was limited to 150 students, the results of the pilot study do not yield sufficient information to recommend policy decisions. The CDE recommended a more extensive and systematic study be conducted at a later date when the English Learner Proficiency Assessment is operational.

1. Technical clean-up. As currently drafted, the bill creates duplicate definitions, adds new language to provisions which have sunset and modifies language intended to conform to federal law requirements.

Staff recommends that the bill be redrafted to ensure that these provisions are appropriately and accurately incorporated into the Education Code. Specifically:

• 1. Staff recommends the bill be amended to delete Section 1 of the bill.
  2. Staff also recommends the bill be amended to delete Section 2 of the bill and to instead insert the provisions of subdivision (c) in section 313.2.
     1. On Page 5, line 6, the language should be redrafted to read “In addition to the information required in subdivision (b) of section 440, the notice of assessment of a child’s English proficiency shall include the following information:”
     2. On Page 5, line 9 to add before the period “as those terms are defined in section 313.1”
  3. Staff further recommends that Section 3 of the bill be deleted and a new section containing these provisions be established within Chapter 3 (Sections 300-340).

1. English learners. The California Department of Education (CDE) provides the following information on English learners in California's public schools:
2. In the 2014-15 school year there were approximately 1.4 million English learners in California public schools, constituting 22.3 percent of the total enrollment.
3. Over 2.6 million students (42.9 percent of public school enrollment) spoke a language other than English in their home.
4. 73 percent of English learners are enrolled in the elementary grades (K-6) with the remaining 27 percent enrolled in grades 7-12.
5. Although English learner data is collected for 60 language groups, 94 percent speak one of the top ten languages in the state, which include Spanish (83.7 percent), Vietnamese, Pilipino (Filipino or Tagalog), Cantonese, Mandarin, Arabic, Hmong, Korean, Punjabi, and Russian.
6. During 2013-14 the CDE administered the California English Language Development Test (CELDT) to 1.4 million students, 1.1 million of whom were tested under the annual assessment window.
7. In 2012-13 and 2013-14, approximately 12 percent of English learners were reclassified as English proficient. Prior to that approximately 11 percent of English learners were annually reclassified, with the notable exception that in 2011-12, 16.3 percent were reclassified.

SUPPORT

Association of California School Administrators

San Diego Unified School District

OPPOSITION

None received.

-- END --

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 491

Author:(Gonzalez)

As Amended Ver:April 30, 2015

Majority vote

SUMMARY: Requires the California Department of Education (CDE) to recommend, and the State Board of Education (SBE) to adopt, best practices for the reclassification of English learners, by July 2022. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires the CDE, by January 1, 2019, to issue a report that includes the department's findings, research, analysis, recommendations, and best practices with regard to the reclassification of English learners.

2. Requires, by July 1, 2022, the CDE to recommend, and the SBE to adopt, the CDE's recommendations and best practices with regard to the reclassification of English learners.

3. Repeals a requirement for a report required to be completed by January 1, 2017, to address any changes in analysis and recommendations on reclassification resulting from the adoption of the Common Core standards in mathematics and the Next Generation Science Standards.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires the CDE, by January 1, 2014, to review and analyze the criteria, policies, and practices used by a sampling of school districts that represent the geographic, socioeconomic, and demographic diversity of the state to reclassify English learners, and recommend to the Legislature and SBE any guideline, regulatory, or statutory changes that the CDE determines are necessary to identify when English learners are prepared for the successful transition to classrooms and curricula that require English proficiency.

2. Requires, for purposes of completing that review, the CDE to consult with various parties, and examine: practices of a sampling of school districts, the extent to which current requirements are being followed, and the range of reclassification criteria developed by school districts.

3. Requires the CDE, by January 1, 2014, to issue a report that includes the CDE's findings, research, analysis, recommendations, and identified best practices.

4. Requires, by January 1, 2017, the CDE to issue an updated report that reflects any changes in analysis and recommendations as a result of the adoption by the SBE of the Common Core standards in English language arts and the English Language Development standards.

5. Requires the CDE, with the approval of the SBE, to establish procedures for the reclassification of a student from English learner to English proficient, and requires that the reclassification procedures use multiple criteria in determining whether to reclassify a student.

6. Establishes the California English Language Development Test (CELDT) to identify students who are limited English proficient, to determine the level of English proficiency of students, and to assess the progress of English learners in acquiring the skills of listening, speaking, reading, and writing in English.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, one-time General Fund contract costs to the CDE in the range of $450,000 to $670,000 to complete reporting requirements, likely through a contract. CDE states data from an initial report can be used as a foundation for the report required by this bill. Additionally, recent amendments remove a second reporting requirement. These factors suggest costs will likely to be at the lower end of the estimated range.

COMMENTS:

Concerns about the current reclassification system. In setting policy regarding the reclassification of English learners, both the state and school districts must strike a delicate balance in order to avoid reclassifying students too early or too late. If students are prematurely reclassified they may lose needed instructional support and may be unprepared to succeed academically. And if reclassification occurs too late, students' academic options may be limited, depriving them of important educational opportunities.

The reclassification system for English learners is set out in statute and conducted under guidelines issued by the SBE which specify four criteria for reclassification. There is considerable flexibility under statute and these guidelines. Districts may adopt different thresholds on CELDT and basic skills assessments, and may also adopt additional measures. Two of these measures, while important, are also open-ended in nature. As a result the reclassification process varies by district.

SB 1108 history. SB 1108 (Padilla), Chapter 434, Statutes of 2012, required the CDE to undertake a review of the reclassification system, contingent on funding being provided for that purpose. No state funding was provided, and CDE could not use federal funds for this purpose. The CDE entered into a memorandum of understanding with the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) which allowed the CDE to share data from the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System for the purpose of the required analysis. The CDE intended that the report would assist in meeting the requirements of SB 1108. The PPIC issued that report in January, 2014, but the CDE believes that it was not sufficient to meet the requirements of SB 1108 or to form the basis for recommendations to the SBE regarding reclassification. In 2014 the author of SB 1108 introduced a new bill, also numbered SB 1108 (of the 2014 Regular Session), which would have required the CDE to recommend, and the SBE to adopt, best practices regarding reclassification. That bill died in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

PPIC report on reclassification. In January 2014, the PPIC issued the report described above, Reclassification of English Learners in California Schools. The report provided the first longitudinal analysis of reclassification practices of California schools, using data from 2007-08 through 2012-13 (excluding charter schools), and found that:

1. Reclassified English learners not only outperform English learners, but also often do as well as native English speakers on measures of academic outcomes.

2. More than 90% of districts in the analysis use more demanding criteria than are suggested by the SBE reclassification guidelines.

3. Districts using more stringent reclassification criteria have lower reclassification rates.

4. The use of stricter criteria was associated with better outcomes for reclassified fluent-English-proficient students on standardized tests in sixth grade and 8th grade, more on-time progression in 8th grade, but for students reclassified in 9th grade a reduced likelihood of graduating from high school.

The report also noted that two major changes in education pose new questions for the reclassification of English learners: the Common Core State Standards and the Local Control Funding Formula. The first will require reclassification criteria to be reset with reference to the new Common Core aligned assessment. The Local Control Funding Formula "may reduce districts' incentives to reclassify students," as it does not provide a funding adjustment for reclassified students (though the report noted that many reclassified students are also from low income families and so would continue to generate an adjustment). The report recommended the adoption of one statewide standard for reclassifying students based on the assessments and levels recommended in the guidelines provided by the SBE. It noted that in most cases this would mean a lowering of the standards which districts are currently using.

Reclassification criteria in flux as districts transition to new test data. Changes to the state's assessment system are resulting in changes to two of the criteria required to be used in reclassification. The state has not produced statewide assessment data for two years while the transition to Common Core aligned assessments is taking place. This set of data represents the fourth criteria required to be used in reclassification. The CDE has advised districts that current law allows the use of "locally available assessment results," and has provided examples of acceptable assessment data districts could use in the reclassification process. In addition, the first criterion for reclassification is also undergoing transition. Starting in 2017-18, the state will begin using a new Common Core aligned measure of English proficiency to replace the CELDT – the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (ELPAC).

State still needs data for policy decisions around reclassification. There are important policy questions to be answered by the analysis required by SB 1108, with implications for the educational success of many students. The assessments set to be implemented this year and in 2017-18 will have a significant impact on reclassification criteria, so it would appear that the time is right to plan for a new analysis of the system. Both the author and the CDE agree that the PPIC report’s findings are an insufficient basis for recommendations to the SBE on changes to the reclassification system, as proposed by this bill. The author intends that the CDE conduct the analysis required by SB 1108 before making such recommendations.

Analysis Prepared by: Tanya Lieberman / ED. / (916) 319-2087 FN: 0000714

Date of Hearing: May 6, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Jimmy Gomez, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 491

Author:(Gonzalez) – As Amended Ver:April 30, 2015

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

SUMMARY:

This bill extends, from January 1, 2014, to January 1, 2019, the deadline for the California Department of Education (CDE) to issue the report on English learner (EL) reclassification established by SB 1108 (Padilla), Chapter 434, Statutes of 2012. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires the CDE to recommend, and the State Board of Education (SBE) to adopt, best practices for the reclassification of English learners, by July 1, 2022, pursuant to the findings the new report.

2. Deletes the existing law requirement to report by January 1, 2017, changes in analysis and recommendations on reclassification resulting from the adoption of the Common Core standards in mathematics and the Next Generation Science Standards.

FISCAL EFFECT:

One-time General Fund contract costs to the CDE in the range of $450,000 to $670,000 to complete reporting requirements, likely through a contract. According to CDE, data from an initial report can be used as a foundation for the report required by this bill, this suggests costs will likely to be at the lower end of the estimated range.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. California K-12 public schools serve about 1.4 million English Learners (EL), representing about 22 percent of the student body. The EL classification is meant to be temporary, eventually leading to reclassified of a student as Fluent English Proficient. School districts across the state have different criteria for reclassification of EL students; some have rigorous reclassification standards and lower reclassification rates, others have high reclassification rates and more lenient standards. Many more fall in between.

SB 1108 (Padilla), Chapter 434, Statutes of 2012, required the CDE to undertake a review of the reclassification system, contingent on funding provided for that purpose. Cost estimates for this report ranged from between $450,000 to $500,000. Ultimately, no state funding was provided and CDE could not use federal funds for this purpose.

The CDE entered into a memorandum of understanding with the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) to assist in meeting the requirements of SB 1108. In January 2014, PPIC issued the report; however, CDE believes it was not sufficient to meet the requirements of SB 1108 or to form the basis for recommendations to the SBE regarding reclassification.

This bill will build upon the PPIC report and provide a framework, developed by the Department of Education, on the best way to serve our English Learner population.

2. Prior related legislation. SB 1108 (Padilla) of 2014, similar to this bill, would have extended the deadline for the CDE to issue the report on English learner (EL) reclassification. This bill also added “reclassified English learners” as a numerically significant pupil subgroup for the purposes of the Academic Performance Index (API). This bill was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee on the Suspense file.

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

Date of Hearing: April 22, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Patrick O'Donnell, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 491

Author:(Gonzalez) – As Amended Ver:April 14, 2015

SUBJECT: English learners: reclassification

SUMMARY: Requires the California Department of Education (CDE) to recommend, and the State Board of Education (SBE) to adopt, best practices for the reclassification of English learners, by July, 2016. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires the CDE to recommend, and the SBE to adopt, best practices for the reclassification of English learners, by July, 2016, pursuant to the findings of the report on reclassification procedures which was to be completed by January 1, 2014.

2. Requires that a report required (by current law) to be completed by January 1, 2017 address any changes in analysis and recommendations on reclassification resulting from the adoption of the Common Core standards in mathematics and the Next Generation Science Standards.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires the CDE, by January 1, 2014, to review and analyze the criteria, policies, and practices used by a sampling of school districts that represent the geographic, socioeconomic, and demographic diversity of the state to reclassify English learners, and recommend to the Legislature and SBE any guideline, regulatory, or statutory changes that the CDE determines are necessary to identify when English learners are prepared for the successful transition to classrooms and curricula that require English proficiency.

2. Requires, for purposes of completing that review, the CDE to consult with various parties, and examine: practices of a sampling of school districts, the extent to which current requirements are being followed, and the range of reclassification criteria developed by school districts.

3. Requires the CDE, by January 1, 2014, to issue a report that includes the CDE’s findings, research, analysis, recommendations, and identified best practices.

4. Requires, by January 1, 2017, the CDE to issue an updated report that reflects any changes in analysis and recommendations as a result of the adoption by the SBE of the Common Core standards in English language arts and the English Language Development standards.

5. Defines “English learner” or “pupil of limited English proficiency,” and requires each school district to assess the English language development of each of those students within 30 days of initial enrollment and annually thereafter to assess until the students are redesignated as fluent English proficient.

6. Requires the CDE, with the approval of the SBE, to establish procedures for the reclassification of a student from English learner to English proficient.

7. Requires that the reclassification procedures developed by the CDE use multiple criteria in determining whether to reclassify a student, including, but not limited to, all of the following:

1. Assessment of language proficiency using an objective assessment instrument, including, but not limited to, the California English Language Development Test (CELDT)

2. Teacher evaluation, including, but not limited to, a review of the student’s curriculum mastery

3. Parent opinion and consultation

4. Comparison of the performance of the student in basic skills with those of his or her peers

8. Establishes the CELDT to identify students who are limited English proficient, to determine the level of English proficiency of students, and to assess the progress of English learners in acquiring the skills of listening, speaking, reading, and writing in English.

9. Requires the CDE, by January 1, 2015, to recommend to the SBE any modifications to the ELD standards to link them with the Common Core mathematics standards and the Next Generation Science Standards.

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown

COMMENTS:

Need for the bill. The author’s office states, “According to the Public Policy Institute of California, our K–12 public schools serve about 1.4 million English Learners, representing about 22 percent of the student body. The EL classification is meant to be temporary, and those students who are reclassified as Fluent English Proficient tend to be among the best performing in the state.

The problem with reclassification is that school districts across the state have different criteria; some have rigorous reclassification standards and lower reclassification rates, others have high reclassification rates and more lenient standards. Many more fall in between. The same report also found that 90% of all districts use a more demanding criteria than the one suggested by the State Department of Education. It is now time to come up with a new current standard for all districts in California by using those policies that have proven to work the best across school districts as examples.

As shown in the PPIC report, the current reclassification standards need guidance. AB 491 will provide a framework, developed by the Department of Education, on what is the best way to serve our English Learner population.”

Concerns about the current reclassification system. In setting policy regarding the reclassification of English learners, both the state and school districts must strike a delicate balance in order to avoid reclassifying students too early or too late. If students are prematurely reclassified they may lose needed instructional support and may be unprepared to succeed academically. And if reclassification occurs too late, students’ academic options may be limited, depriving them of important educational opportunities.

The reclassification system for English learners is set out in statute and conducted under guidelines issued by the SBE which specify four criteria for reclassification. These guidelines are:

• Scores at the early advanced or higher level overall on the CELDT, and scores at intermediate or higher in listening and speaking, reading, and writing

• Teacher evaluation using student’s academic performance data

• Parents are notified of their rights to provide input, and are encouraged to participate in the reclassification process, including through a face-to-face meeting.

• Student scores in the range between the beginning of basic and midpoint of basic on the English language arts (ELA) California Standardized Test (CST), but each district may set their own cut point in that range

There is considerable flexibility under statute and these guidelines. Districts may adopt different thresholds on CELDT and basic skills assessments, and may also adopt additional measures. Two of these measures, while important, are also open-ended in nature. As a result the reclassification process varies by district.

In explaining the intent behind SB 1108 of the 2011-12 Session (described below), the author stated, “Current law is not limited to these four criteria and allows school districts to create any amount of their own. This has led to inconsistency in the reclassification system. Every school in California has their own, unique criteria for reclassifying English Learners. California cannot hold the English Learner system accountable when every school is using different measurements of accountability.”

SB 1108 history. SB 1108 (Padilla), Chapter 434, Statutes of 2012, required the CDE to undertake a review of the reclassification system, contingent on funding being provided for that purpose. No state funding was provided, and CDE could not use federal funds for this purpose.

The CDE entered into a memorandum of understanding with the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) which allowed the CDE to share data from the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System for the purpose of the required analysis. The CDE intended that the report would assist in meeting the requirements of SB 1108.

The PPIC issued that report in January, 2014, but the CDE believes that it was not sufficient to meet the requirements of SB 1108 or to form the basis for recommendations to the SBE regarding reclassification. The CDE notes that while the report provided important information, the PPIC did not collect or analyze policies but instead surveyed districts about their policies. They also did not convene a group of experts as required by SB 1108. Because of the timing of the report, it also could not take into account two factors affecting reclassification: the transition to new Common Core aligned assessments and the new English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (ELPAC) which will be used beginning in 2017-18.

In 2014 the author of SB 1108 introduced a new bill, also numbered SB 1108 (of the 2013-14 Session), which would have required (as this bill does) the CDE to recommend, and the SBE to adopt, best practices regarding reclassification. That bill died in the Senate Appropriations Committee. This bill, AB 491, largely mirrors that the SB 1108 of last session.

PPIC report on reclassification. In January 2014, the PPIC issued the report described above, Reclassification of English Learners in California Schools. The report provided the first longitudinal analysis of reclassification practices of California schools, using data from 2007-08 through 2012-13 (excluding charter schools), and found that:

• Reclassified English learners not only outperform English learners, but also often do as well as native English speakers on measures of academic outcomes

• More than 90 percent of districts in the analysis use more demanding criteria than are suggested by the SBE reclassification guidelines

• Districts using more stringent reclassification criteria have lower reclassification rates. The study found that if the average reclassification rate among districts using Basic or higher (as suggested by the SBE guidelines) were 10 percent, districts that use Proficient or higher would have reclassification rates of 7 percent - a 30 percent reduction in the number of students reclassified in districts using the more rigorous criterion.

• The use of stricter criteria was associated with better outcomes for RFEP students on standardized tests in sixth grade and 8^th grade, more on-time progression in 8^th grade, but for students reclassified in 9^th grade a reduced likelihood of graduating from high school.

The report also noted that two major changes in education pose new questions for the reclassification of English learners: the Common Core State Standards and the Local Control Funding Formula. The first will require reclassification criteria to be reset with reference to the new Common Core aligned assessment. The Local Control Funding Formula “may reduce districts’ incentives to reclassify students,” as it does not provide a funding adjustment for reclassified students (though the report noted that many reclassified students are also from low income families and so would continue to generate an adjustment).

The report recommended the adoption of one statewide standard for reclassifying students based on the assessments and levels recommended in the guidelines provided by the SBE. It noted that in most cases this would mean a lowering of the standards which districts are currently using.

Reclassification criteria in flux as districts transition to new test data. Changes to the state’s assessment system are resulting in changes to two of the criteria required to be used in reclassification.

The state has not produced statewide assessment data for two years while the transition to Common Core aligned assessments is taking place. This set of data represents the fourth criteria required to be used in reclassification. The CDE has advised districts that current law allows the use of "locally available assessment results,” and has provided examples of acceptable assessment data districts could use in the reclassification process.

In addition, the first criterion for reclassification is also undergoing transition. Starting in 2017-18, the state will begin using a new Common Core aligned measure of English proficiency to replace the CELDT – the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (ELPAC).

State still needs data for policy decisions around reclassification. There are important policy questions to be answered by the analysis required by SB 1108, with implications for the educational success of many students. The assessments set to be implemented this year and in 2017-18 will have a significant impact on reclassification criteria, so it would appear that the time is right to plan for a new analysis of the system.

Both the author and the CDE agree that the PPIC report’s findings are an insufficient basis for recommendations to the SBE on changes to the reclassification system, as proposed by this bill. The author intends that the CDE conduct the analysis required by SB 1108 before making such recommendations. Staff recommends that the bill be amended to:

1) change the date of the first report required in current law to January 1, 2019, which will allow for analysis of one full year of data from the ELPAC

2) delete the requirement in current law for a second report

3) change the date (proposed by this bill) by which recommendations would be made to the SBE to January 1, 2022.

What form will changes to the system take? SB 1108 provides significant flexibility for the form of a statewide policy on reclassification, directing the CDE to recommend any guideline, regulatory, or statutory changes” necessary to make needed changes to the reclassification system. The author’s intent is that the state establish a statewide standard for reclassification, but the Committee may wish to consider that by leaving the mechanism unspecified, changes to the system could range from voluntary (guidelines) to mandatory (statute, regulations) in nature.

The role of the Legislature. By requiring the SBE to adopt recommendations from the CDE by 2022 (under the amendments described above), this bill sets a deadline for changes to the reclassification system. Several years prior to the adoption of these changes, the CDE must report its recommendations to the Legislature. Clearly, any recommendations that require statutory change would require action by the Legislature. But absent such action, the SBE would have the authority to adopt recommendations from the CDE (within the requirements of current law). The Committee may wish to consider whether this bill provides sufficient opportunity for Legislative input in changes to the reclassification system.

Related legislation. SB 409 (De Leon) of this Session would require the CDE, by January 1, 2017, to contract with an outside research organization to conduct the analysis required by SB 1108, and add to it an analysis of the criteria, policies, and practices school districts use to meet the state priorities identified in their local control and accountability plans (LCAPs). The bill would require the CDE to identify any student outcome measures related to meeting the state priorities in the LCAPs related to the education of English learners, and require the CDE to recommend policy changes to the Legislature.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

San Diego Unified School District

Opposition

None on file

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