THIRD READING  

Bill No: SB 1213

Author: Leyva (D)

Amended: 3/25/20

Vote: 21

SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 6-0, 5/12/20

AYES: Leyva, Wilk, Chang, Durazo, McGuire, Pan

NO VOTE RECORDED: Glazer

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 6/18/20

AYES: Portantino, Bates, Bradford, Hill, Jones, Leyva, Wieckowski

SUBJECT: Pupil instruction: history-social science academic content standards: revisions

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST:

This bill requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI), in consultation with the Instructional Quality Commission (IQC) and by November 30, 2023, to recommend to the State Board of Education (SBE) revisions to the history-social science academic content standards, and requires the SBE to adopt, reject, or modify the recommendations by January 31, 2024.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1) Required the SBE, by January 1, 1998, to adopt statewide academically rigorous content standards, pursuant to the recommendations of the Commission for the Establishment of Academic Content and Performance Standards, in the core curriculum areas of reading, writing, and mathematics to serve as the basis for assessing the academic achievement of individual pupils and of schools, school districts, and the California educational system. (Education Code § 60605)

2) Required the SBE, by November 1, 1998, to also adopt such standards in the core curriculum areas of history/social science and science. (EC § 60605)

This bill requires the SPI, in consultation with the IQC and by November 30, 2023, to recommend to the SBE revisions to the history-social science academic content standards, and requires the SBE to adopt, reject, or modify the recommendations by January 31, 2024. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires the SPI, in consultation with the IQC, to recommend to the SBE revisions to the history-social science academic content standards that were adopted by the SBE in 1998
2. Requires the SPI, by November 30, 2023, to present to the SBE the revised history-social science academic content standards, based on the work of the group of experts, conducted in consultation with the IQC.
3. Requires the SBE, by January 31, 2024, to adopt, reject, or modify and revisions recommended by the SPI.
4. Requires the SPI, in consultation with the IQC and the SBE, to select a group of experts in history-social science for purposes of assisting the SPI in developing recommendations for revisions to the standards. This bill requires a majority of this group of experts to be current public school elementary or secondary classroom teachers who have a valid California professional teaching credential.
5. Requires the National Curriculum Standards for Social Studies and the College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework for Social Studies State Standards, developed by the National Council for the Social Studies, to serve as the basis for deliberations regarding revisions to the history-social science academic content standards.
6. Requires the SPI, in consultation with the IQC, to hold a minimum of two public hearings in order for the public to provide input on the recommended revisions, and requires the SBE to adopt, reject, or modify those recommendations at a subsequent public meeting.
7. Requires the SBE, if it modifies any revisions recommended to these content standards, to explain in writing to the Governor and the Legislature the reasons for modifying the recommended revised content standards.
8. Requires the SBE, if it modifies the history-social science academic content standards recommended by the SPI, in a meeting conducted pursuant to the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, provide written reasons for its revisions. This bill prohibits the SBE from adopting revised standards at the same meeting it provides its written reasons, but must adopt the revisions at a subsequent meeting conducted no later than March 31, 2024.
9. Requires the SBE, if it rejects the history-social science academic standards recommended by the SPI, to transmit to the SPI, the Governor, and the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature a specific written explanation of the reasons for the rejection of the standards presented by the SPI.
10. Authorizes the SBE, if the revisions to the history-social science academic content standards are adopted, to revise its adoption schedule for curriculum framework, evaluation criteria for instructional materials, and adoption of instructional materials for kindergarten and grades 1 to 8, inclusive, that are aligned to the history-social studies academic standards, based on recommendations of the IQC.
11. Requires the public hearings and meetings to be held pursuant to the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act.

Background

1. Academic content standards. Academic content standards define the knowledge, concepts, and skills that students should acquire at each grade level. The standards also serve as the basis for the curriculum frameworks and are a criteria by which instructional materials are evaluated. Standards in several subject areas were adopted by the SBE beginning in the late 1990s. Unlike the curriculum frameworks, there is no statutory authority for the review or updating of standards.

The SBE has adopted the following standards:

• 1. Visual and Performing Arts Standards, revised January 2019 (originally adopted January 2001).
  2. World Languages Standards, revised January 2019 (originally adopted January 2009).
  3. California Computer Science Standards, adopted September 2018.
  4. Next Generation Science Standards, revised September 2013 (original science standards adopted October 1998).
  5. Common Core Standards in English Language Arts (ELA), modified March 2013 and revised January 2010 (original ELA standards adopted December 1997).
  6. Common Core Standards for Mathematics, modified January 2013 and revised August 2010 (original math standards adopted December 1997).
  7. Career Technical Education Standards, revised January 2013 (originally adopted May 2005).
  8. English Language Development Standards, adopted November 2012.
  9. Model School Library Standards, adopted September 2010.
  10. Health Standards, adopted March 2008.
  11. Physical Education Standards, adopted January 2005.
  12. History-Social Science, adopted October 1998.

1. Comprehensive approach stalled. There is no statutory authority for the regular review or updating of standards. Recently, statutory authority has been provided to develop new standards in computer science and to revise existing standards, in world languages and visual and performing arts. Last year, AB 852 (Burke and Weber, 2019) attempted to establish a comprehensive approach by requiring the regular review and possible updating of the standards, but it was vetoed by the Governor, who stated:

This bill creates a new process to routinely evaluate and revise academic content standards. AB 852 shifts the responsibility from the State Board of Education to the State Superintendent of Public to review and recommend updates to academic content standards.

I do not support shifting this responsibility away from the State Board of Education or further complicating the current process.

A similar bill, AB 740 (Weber, 2015), also failed when stalled in the Senate Appropriations Committee due to a disagreement with the Administration over which entity should update the standards, a panel of subject matter experts for each standard or the Instructional Quality Commission. Absent a comprehensive approach to the revision of all standards and frameworks, a one-off measure that addresses the most outdated standards is required to bring the history-social science standards into the 21st century.

1. The National Curriculum Standards for Social Studies and the C3 Framework for Social Studies State Standards. This bill requires the National Curriculum Standards for Social Studies and the C3 Framework, developed by developed by the National Council for the Social Studies, to serve as the basis for deliberations regarding revisions to the history-social science academic content standards.

According to the National Council for the Social Studies, it “first published national curriculum standards in 1994. Since then, [its] social studies standards have been widely and successfully used as a framework for teachers, schools, districts, states, and other nations as a tool for curriculum alignment and development. However, much has changed in the world and in education since these curriculum standards were published. [Its] 2010 revision aims to provide a framework for teaching, learning, and assessment in social studies that includes a sharper articulation of curriculum objectives, and reflects greater consistency across the different sections of the document. It incorporates current research and suggestions for improvement from many experienced practitioners. These revised standards reflect a desire to continue and build upon the expectations established in the original standards for effective social studies in the grades from pre-K through 12.”

Additionally, the C3 Framework for Social Studies State Standards, which is the result of a three year state-led collaborative effort, “was developed to serve two audiences: for states to upgrade their state social studies standards and for practitioners — local school districts, schools, teachers and curriculum writers — to strengthen their social studies programs. Its objectives are to: a) enhance the rigor of the social studies disciplines; b) build critical thinking, problem solving, and participatory skills to become engaged citizens; and c) align academic programs to the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts and Literacy in History/Social Studies.”

1. Author’s intent moving forward. This bill is not necessary this session to address the COVID-19 emergency that the state is facing. However, as policymakers, stakeholders, and agencies continue to evaluate potentially necessary legislative needs in this evolving environment, it may become necessary to have a bill on an issue not yet considered by the Legislature this session. This bill, as it moves forward, would serve that purpose and not its current contents. Should the bill not be needed for that purpose, the author will not continue to move the bill.

Comments

Need for the bill. According to the author, “California’s History-Social Science content standards are outdated. Unlike curriculum frameworks and the guidelines for selecting instructional materials, which are on an eight-year cycle, there is no schedule for the revision of the content standards in any subject. Instead, one-off pieces of legislation are required in order to adopt or revise content standards. Most of California’s 12 content standards have been revised since 2008, but the History-Social Science standards are the only ones that have not been updated or revised since 1998.

The outdated nature of our History-Social Sciences content standards means that the curriculum framework for History-Social Science that is scheduled to be revised in 2024 will once again be revised based on outdated content standards, just as it was in 2016. Outdated content standards also mean that teachers are forced to seek out more recently adopted content standards, such as those developed by the National Council for Social Studies, to guide their practice and elevate their lesson planning. In short, outdated content standards means outdated learning. We need revised History-Social Science content standards to ensure that our students receive the highest quality instruction in History-Social Science, which includes economics, civic engagement and financial literacy.”

Related/Prior Legislation

AB 852 (Burke and Weber, 2019) would have established a process for the regular revision of academic content standards prior to the revision of curriculum frameworks. As discussed above, AB 852 was vetoed by the Governor.

AB 2290 (Santiago, Chapter 643, Statutes of 2016) authorized the SPI to recommend to the SBE revisions to the world language content standards by January 31, 2019.

AB 2862 (O’Donnell, Chapter 647, Statutes of 2016) authorized the SPI to recommend to the SBE revisions to the visual and performing arts content standards by January 1, 2019.

AB 740 (Weber, 2015) would have required the SPI, by January 1, 2017, to recommend to the SBE a schedule for the regular update of academic content standards. AB 740 would have granted the SBE the authority to convene academic content standards advisory committees to update the standards, and requires that the SBE adopt or reject them. AB 740 died in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

AB 1539 (Hagman, Chapter 876, Statutes of 2014) required the IQC to consider developing and recommending computer science content standards by July 31, 2019.

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

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, the California Department of Education estimates one-time General Fund costs of approximately $406,000 for the development of new content standards. This estimate includes the cost to convene an academic content standards review committee to recommend updates to the standards and the contract with a primary writer.

SUPPORT: (Verified 6/19/20)

None received

OPPOSITION: (Verified 6/19/20)

None received

Prepared by: Brandon Darnell / ED. /

6/19/20 16:41:04

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Anthony Portantino, Chair

2019 - 2020 Regular Session

SB 1213 (Leyva) - Pupil instruction: history-social science academic content standards: revisions

Bill Summary:

This bill requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI), in consultation with the Instructional Quality Commission (IQC) and by November 30, 2023, to recommend to the State Board of Education (SBE) revisions to the history-social science academic content standards, and requires the SBE to adopt, reject, or modify the recommendations by January 31, 2024.

Fiscal Impact:

The California Department of Education (CDE) estimates one-time General Fund costs of approximately $406,000 for the development of new content standards. This estimate includes the cost to convene an academic content standards review committee to recommend updates to the standards and the contract with a primary writer.

Background:

Academic content standards define the knowledge, concepts, and skills that students should acquire at each grade level. Curricular frameworks are the blueprint for implementing the standards, and include criteria by which instructional materials are evaluated. The Instructional Quality Commission (IQC) advises the SBE on curriculum and instruction matters. There is no statutory authority for the review or updating of standards. Specific authority, and one-time funding, has historically been provided to develop new standards in specific subjects. For example, AB 2862 (O’Donnell), Chapter 647, Statutes of 2016 authorized the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) to recommend to the SBE revisions to the content standards in visual and performing arts, and authorized the SBE to adopt, reject, or modify the revised standards by January 1, 2019.

A schedule once existed for the review and update of frameworks and instructional materials in many subject areas, but those processes were suspended in 2009, due to budget constraints, through the 2015-16 fiscal year. During the suspension special authority and one-time funding has been provided to develop certain curriculum frameworks and adopt instructional materials. The history-social science standards were last adopted in October 1998.

Proposed Law:

This bill requires the SPI, in consultation with the IQC and by November 30, 2023, to recommend to the SBE revisions to the history-social science academic content standards, and requires the SBE to adopt, reject, or modify the recommendations by January 31, 2024, as specified.

Related Legislation:

AB 852 (Burke and Weber, 2019) would have established a process for the regular revision of academic content standards prior to the revision of curriculum frameworks. AB 852 was vetoed by the Governor with the following message:

This bill creates a new process to routinely evaluate and revise academic content standards. AB 852 shifts the responsibility from the State Board of Education to the State Superintendent of Public to review and recommend updates to academic content standards.

I do not support shifting this responsibility away from the State Board of Education or further complicating the current process.

AB 2290 (Santiago, Ch. 2290, Stats. 2016) authorizes the SPI to recommend to the SBE revisions to the world language content standards by January 31, 2019.

AB 2862 (O’Donnell, Ch. 647, Stats. 2016) authorizes the SPI to recommend to the SBE revisions to the visual and performing arts content standards by January 1, 2019.

Staff Comments:

Revising academic content standards triggers the need to update the corresponding the curriculum frameworks and evaluation criteria for the instructional materials adoption so that they are all in alignment. Similarly, there would be a state and local cost pressure to provide and purchase instructional materials and to provide professional development to implement the new content standards.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Senator Connie Leyva, Chair

2019 - 2020 Regular

Bill No: SB 1213 Hearing Date: May 11, 2020

Subject: Pupil instruction: history-social science academic content standards: revisions.

SUMMARY

This bill requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI), in consultation with the Instructional Quality Commission (IQC) and by November 30, 2023, to recommend to the State Board of Education (SBE) revisions to the history-social science academic content standards, and requires the SBE to adopt, reject, or modify the recommendations by January 31, 2024.

BACKGROUND

Existing law:

1) Required the SBE, by January 1, 1998, to adopt statewide academically rigorous content standards, pursuant to the recommendations of the Commission for the Establishment of Academic Content and Performance Standards, in the core curriculum areas of reading, writing, and mathematics to serve as the basis for assessing the academic achievement of individual pupils and of schools, school districts, and the California educational system. (Education Code § 60605)

2) Required the SBE, by November 1, 1998, to also adopt such standards in the core curriculum areas of history/social science and science. (EC § 60605)

ANALYSIS

This bill requires the SPI, in consultation with the IQC and by November 30, 2023, to recommend to the SBE revisions to the history-social science academic content standards, and requires the SBE to adopt, reject, or modify the recommendations by January 31, 2024. Specifically, this bill:

1) Requires the SPI, in consultation with the IQC, to recommend to the SBE revisions to the history-social science academic content standards that were adopted by the SBE in 1998.

2) Requires the SPI, by November 30, 2023, to present to the SBE the revised history-social science academic content standards, based on the work of the group of experts, conducted in consultation with the IQC.

3) Requires the SBE, by January 31, 2024, to adopt, reject, or modify and revisions recommended by the SPI.

4) Requires the SPI, in consultation with the IQC and the SBE, to select a group of experts in history-social science for purposes of assisting the SPI in developing recommendations for revisions to the standards. This bill requires a majority of this group of experts to be current public school elementary or secondary classroom teachers who have a valid California professional teaching credential.

5) Requires the National Curriculum Standards for Social Studies and the College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework for Social Studies State Standards, developed by the National Council for the Social Studies, to serve as the basis for deliberations regarding revisions to the history-social science academic content standards.

6) Requires the SPI, in consultation with the IQC, to hold a minimum of two public hearings in order for the public to provide input on the recommended revisions, and requires the SBE to adopt, reject, or modify those recommendations at a subsequent public meeting.

7) Requires the SBE, if it modifies any revisions recommended to these content standards, to explain in writing to the Governor and the Legislature the reasons for modifying the recommended revised content standards.

8) Requires the SBE, if it modifies the history-social science academic content standards recommended by the SPI, in a meeting conducted pursuant to the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, provide written reasons for its revisions. This bill prohibits the SBE from adopting revised standards at the same meeting it provides its written reasons, but must adopt the revisions at a subsequent meeting conducted no later than March 31, 2024.

9) Requires the SBE, if it rejects the history-social science academic standards recommended by the SPI, to transmit to the SPI, the Governor, and the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature a specific written explanation of the reasons for the rejection of the standards presented by the SPI.

11) Authorizes the SBE, if the revisions to the history-social science academic content standards are adopted, to revise its adoption schedule for curriculum framework, evaluation criteria for instructional materials, and adoption of instructional materials for kindergarten and grades 1 to 8, inclusive, that are aligned to the history-social studies academic standards, based on recommendations of the IQC.

12) Requires the public hearings and meetings to be held pursuant to the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act.

STAFF COMMENTS

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, “California’s History-Social Science content standards are outdated. Unlike curriculum frameworks and the guidelines for selecting instructional materials, which are on an eight-year cycle, there is no schedule for the revision of the content standards in any subject. Instead, one-off pieces of legislation are required in order to adopt or revise content standards. Most of California’s 12 content standards have been revised since 2008, but the History-Social Science standards are the only ones that have not been updated or revised since 1998.

The outdated nature of our History-Social Sciences content standards means that the curriculum framework for History-Social Science that is scheduled to be revised in 2024 will once again be revised based on outdated content standards, just as it was in 2016. Outdated content standards also mean that teachers are forced to seek out more recently adopted content standards, such as those developed by the National Council for Social Studies, to guide their practice and elevate their lesson planning. In short, outdated content standards means outdated learning. We need revised History-Social Science content standards to ensure that our students receive the highest quality instruction in History-Social Science, which includes economics, civic engagement and financial literacy.”

1. Background on academic content standards. Academic content standards define the knowledge, concepts, and skills that students should acquire at each grade level. The standards also serve as the basis for the curriculum frameworks and are a criteria by which instructional materials are evaluated. Standards in several subject areas were adopted by the SBE beginning in the late 1990s. Unlike the curriculum frameworks, there is no statutory authority for the review or updating of standards.

The SBE has adopted the following standards:

• 1. Visual and Performing Arts Standards, revised January 2019 (originally adopted January 2001).
  2. World Languages Standards, revised January 2019 (originally adopted January 2009).
  3. California Computer Science Standards, adopted September 2018.
  4. Next Generation Science Standards, revised September 2013 (original science standards adopted October 1998).
  5. Common Core Standards in English Language Arts (ELA), modified March 2013 and revised January 2010 (original ELA standards adopted December 1997).
  6. Common Core Standards for Mathematics, modified January 2013 and revised August 2010 (original math standards adopted December 1997).
  7. Career Technical Education Standards, revised January 2013 (originally adopted May 2005).
  8. English Language Development Standards, adopted November 2012.
  9. Model School Library Standards, adopted September 2010.
  10. Health Standards, adopted March 2008.
  11. Physical Education Standards, adopted January 2005.
  12. History-Social Science, adopted October 1998.

1. Comprehensive approach stalled. There is no statutory authority for the regular review or updating of standards. Recently, statutory authority has been provided to develop new standards in computer science and to revise existing standards, in world languages and visual and performing arts. Last year, AB 852 (Burke and Weber, 2019) attempted to establish a comprehensive approach by requiring the regular review and possible updating of the standards, but it was vetoed by the Governor, who stated:

This bill creates a new process to routinely evaluate and revise academic content standards. AB 852 shifts the responsibility from the State Board of Education to the State Superintendent of Public to review and recommend updates to academic content standards.

I do not support shifting this responsibility away from the State Board of Education or further complicating the current process.

A similar bill, AB 740 (Weber, 2015), also failed when stalled in the Senate Appropriations Committee due to a disagreement with the Administration over which entity should update the standards, a panel of subject matter experts for each standard or the Instructional Quality Commission. Absent a comprehensive approach to the revision of all standards and frameworks, a one-off measure that addresses the most outdated standards is required to bring the history-social science standards into the 21^st century.

1. The National Curriculum Standards for Social Studies and the C3 Framework for Social Studies State Standards. This bill requires the National Curriculum Standards for Social Studies and the C3 Framework, developed by developed by the National Council for the Social Studies, to serve as the basis for deliberations regarding revisions to the history-social science academic content standards.

According to the National Council for the Social Studies, it “first published national curriculum standards in 1994. Since then, [its] social studies standards have been widely and successfully used as a framework for teachers, schools, districts, states, and other nations as a tool for curriculum alignment and development. However, much has changed in the world and in education since these curriculum standards were published. [Its] 2010 revision aims to provide a framework for teaching, learning, and assessment in social studies that includes a sharper articulation of curriculum objectives, and reflects greater consistency across the different sections of the document. It incorporates current research and suggestions for improvement from many experienced practitioners. These revised standards reflect a desire to continue and build upon the expectations established in the original standards for effective social studies in the grades from pre-K through 12.”

Additionally, the C3 Framework for Social Studies State Standards, which is the result of a three year state-led collaborative effort, “was developed to serve two audiences: for states to upgrade their state social studies standards and for practitioners — local school districts, schools, teachers and curriculum writers — to strengthen their social studies programs. Its objectives are to: a) enhance the rigor of the social studies disciplines; b) build critical thinking, problem solving, and participatory skills to become engaged citizens; and c) align academic programs to the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts and Literacy in History/Social Studies.”

1. Author’s intent moving forward. This bill is not necessary this session to address the COVID-19 emergency that the state is facing. However, as policymakers, stakeholders, and agencies continue to evaluate potentially necessary legislative needs in this evolving environment, it may become necessary to have a bill on an issue not yet considered by the Legislature this session. This bill, as it moves forward, would serve that purpose and not its current contents. Should the bill not be needed for that purpose, the author will not continue to move the bill.
2. Previous legislation. AB 852 (Burke and Weber, 2019) would have established a process for the regular revision of academic content standards prior to the revision of curriculum frameworks. As discussed above, AB 852 was vetoed by the Governor.

AB 2290 (Santiago, Ch. 2290, Stats. 2016) authorizes the SPI to recommend to the SBE revisions to the world language content standards by January 31, 2019.

AB 2862 (O’Donnell, Ch. 647, Stats. 2016) authorizes the SPI to recommend to the SBE revisions to the visual and performing arts content standards by January 1, 2019.

AB 740 (Weber, 2015) would have required the SPI, by January 1, 2017, to recommend to the SBE a schedule for the regular update of academic content standards. AB 740 grants the SBE the authority to convene academic content standards advisory committees to update the standards, and requires that the SBE adopt or reject them. AB 740 died in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

AB 1539 (Hagman, Ch. 876, Stats. 2014) requires the IQC to consider developing and recommending computer science content standards by July 31, 2019.

SUPPORT

None received

OPPOSITION

None received

-- END --