Bill Text: CA SB1108 | 2013-2014 | Regular Session | Amended
Bill Title: English learners: reclassification.
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 1-0)
Status: (Introduced - Dead) 2014-05-23 - Held in committee and under submission. [SB1108 Detail]
Download: California-2013-SB1108-Amended.html
BILL NUMBER: SB 1108 AMENDED
BILL TEXT
AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 3, 2014
INTRODUCED BY Senator Padilla
FEBRUARY 19, 2014
An act to amend Sections 313.5 and 52052 of the Education Code,
relating to English learners.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
SB 1108, as amended, Padilla. English learners: reclassification.
(1) Existing law requires each school district that has one or
more pupils who are English learners, and to the extent required by
federal law, a county office of education and a charter school, to
assess the English language development of each of those pupils in
order to determine their level of proficiency. Existing law requires
the State Department of Education, with the approval of the State
Board of Education, to establish procedures for conducting the
assessment and for the reclassification of a pupil from English
learner to English proficient.
Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to
apportion funds appropriated for purposes of assessing the English
language development of pupils whose primary language is a language
other than English to enable school districts to use the California
English language development test to identify pupils who are limited
English proficient, determine the level of English language
proficiency of those pupils, and to assess the progress of those
pupils in acquiring the skills of listening, reading, speaking, and
writing in English.
Existing law requires the department, 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 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 requires the department, by January 1, 2014, to issue
a report on its findings, research, analysis, recommendations, and
best practices, and 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
related English language development standards.
Existing law makes implementation of these provisions contingent
on an appropriation of federal or state funds or on the availability
of private funding.
This bill would additionally require the department, by
January 1, 2016, to recommend, and the state board to adopt, the
department's recommendations and best practices pursuant to the
department's recommendations in the report referenced above.
extend the due date for the department's report
from January 1, 2014, to January 1, 2016.
(2) Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public
Instruction, with the approval of the State Board of Education, to
develop an Academic Performance Index, as specified, to measure the
performance of schools and school districts. Existing law requires
schools and school districts to demonstrate comparable improvement in
academic achievement as measured by the Academic Performance Index
by all numerically significant pupil subgroups at the school or
school district, including ethnic subgroups, socioeconomically
disadvantaged pupils, English learners, pupils with disabilities, and
foster youth.
This bill would add reclassified English learners to the list of
numerically significant pupil subgroups designated in this provision.
To the extent that this provision would impose new duties on schools
and school districts, it would constitute a state-mandated local
program.
(3) 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.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 313.5 of the Education Code is amended to read:
313.5. (a) By January 1, 2014, the department shall 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 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.
(b) For purposes of completing the review and analysis required
pursuant to subdivision (a), the department shall consult with
parents of English learners, experts with demonstrated experience in
developing and administering assessments for English learners,
classroom or resource teachers, or both, school district
administrators with expertise in curriculum, instruction, assessment,
and accountability, and researchers possessing expertise in the
education of English learners.
(c) The group of experts described in subdivision (b) shall
develop a study design that may include a sampling methodology for
purposes of selecting the school districts that will be part of the
review and analysis to identify best practices pursuant to
subdivision (a).
(d) For purposes of completing the review and analysis required
pursuant to subdivision (a), the department shall examine and report
on the following:
(1) The practices and standards used by a sampling of school
districts that represent the geographic, socioeconomic, and
demographic diversity of school districts in the state to meet the
four reclassification criteria specified in subdivision (f) of
Section 313.
(2) The extent to which school districts are following the
guidelines established by the state board.
(3) The range of reclassification criteria developed by school
districts.
(e) As part of the examination required pursuant to subdivision
(d), the department shall analyze the following:
(1) English language proficiency and academic performance data.
(2) The relationship of the reclassification criteria to
reclassification rates.
(3) The academic performance of pupils after reclassification as
English proficient.
(4) The relationship of the reclassification criteria to the
academic performance of pupils after reclassification.
(f) In its report, the department also shall identify any other
pupil outcome measures that indicate an English learner is prepared
to successfully transition to a classroom and curricula that require
English proficiency.
(g) By January 1, 2014, 2016, the
department shall issue a report that includes the department's
findings, research, analysis, recommendations, and best practices
pursuant to subdivisions (a), (d), (e,) (e),
and (f).
(h) By January 1, 2016, the department shall recommend, and the
state board shall adopt, the department's recommendations and best
practices pursuant to subdivisions (a), (d), (e), and (f), as
reported pursuant to subdivision (g).
(i)
(h) By January 1, 2017, the department shall 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 pursuant to Section 60605.8 and the English
language development standards adopted pursuant to former Section
60811.3 as it read on June 30, 2013.
(j)
(i) This section shall be implemented only if state or
federal funds are appropriated as necessary to fully fund this
purpose or if private funds are made available as necessary to fully
fund this purpose.
SEC. 2. Section 52052 of the Education Code is amended to read:
52052. (a) (1) The Superintendent, with approval of the state
board, shall develop an Academic Performance Index (API), to measure
the performance of schools and school districts, especially the
academic performance of pupils.
(2) A school or school district shall demonstrate comparable
improvement in academic achievement as measured by the API by all
numerically significant pupil subgroups at the school or school
district, including:
(A) Ethnic subgroups.
(B) Socioeconomically disadvantaged pupils.
(C) English learners.
(D) Pupils with disabilities.
(E) Foster youth.
(F) Reclassified English learners.
(3) (A) For purposes of this section, a numerically significant
pupil subgroup is one that consists of at least 30 pupils, each of
whom has a valid test score.
(B) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), for a subgroup of pupils who
are foster youth, a numerically significant pupil subgroup is one
that consists of at least 15 pupils.
(C) For a school or school district with an API score that is
based on no fewer than 11 and no more than 99 pupils with valid test
scores, numerically significant pupil subgroups shall be defined by
the Superintendent, with approval by the state board.
(4) (A) The API shall consist of a variety of indicators currently
reported to the department, including, but not limited to, the
results of the achievement test administered pursuant to Section
60640, attendance rates for pupils in elementary schools, middle
schools, and secondary schools, and the graduation rates for pupils
in secondary schools.
(B) The Superintendent, with the approval of the state board, may
also incorporate into the API the rates at which pupils successfully
promote from one grade to the next in middle school and high school,
and successfully matriculate from middle school to high school.
(C) Graduation rates for pupils in secondary schools shall be
calculated for the API as follows:
(i) Four-year graduation rates shall be calculated by taking the
number of pupils who graduated on time for the current school year,
which is considered to be three school years after the pupils entered
grade 9 for the first time, and dividing that number by the total
calculated in clause (ii).
(ii) The number of pupils entering grade 9 for the first time in
the school year three school years before the current school year,
plus the number of pupils who transferred into the class graduating
at the end of the current school year between the school year that
was three school years before the current school year and the date of
graduation, less the number of pupils who transferred out of the
school between the school year that was three school years before the
current school year and the date of graduation who were members of
the class that is graduating at the end of the current school year.
(iii) Five-year graduation rates shall be calculated by taking the
number of pupils who graduated on time for the current school year,
which is considered to be four school years after the pupils entered
grade 9 for the first time, and dividing that number by the total
calculated in clause (iv).
(iv) The number of pupils entering grade 9 for the first time in
the school year four years before the current school year, plus the
number of pupils who transferred into the class graduating at the end
of the current school year between the school year that was four
school years before the current school year and the date of
graduation, less the number of pupils who transferred out of the
school between the school year that was four years before the current
school year and the date of graduation who were members of the class
that is graduating at the end of the current school year.
(v) Six-year graduation rates shall be calculated by taking the
number of pupils who graduated on time for the current school year,
which is considered to be five school years after the pupils entered
grade 9 for the first time, and dividing that number by the total
calculated in clause (vi).
(vi) The number of pupils entering grade 9 for the first time in
the school year five years before the current school year, plus the
number of pupils who transferred into the class graduating at the end
of the current school year between the school year that was five
school years before the current school year and the date of
graduation, less the number of pupils who transferred out of the
school between the school year that was five years before the current
school year and the date of graduation who were members of the class
that is graduating at the end of the current school year.
(D) The inclusion of five- and six-year graduation rates for
pupils in secondary schools shall meet the following requirements:
(i) Schools and school districts shall be granted one-half the
credit in their API scores for graduating pupils in five years that
they are granted for graduating pupils in four years.
(ii) Schools and school districts shall be granted one-quarter the
credit in their API scores for graduating pupils in six years that
they are granted for graduating pupils in four years.
(iii) Notwithstanding clauses (i) and (ii), schools and school
districts shall be granted full credit in their API scores for
graduating in five or six years a pupil with disabilities who
graduates in accordance with his or her individualized education
program.
(E) The pupil data collected for the API that comes from the
achievement test administered pursuant to Section 60640 and the high
school exit examination administered pursuant to Section 60851, when
fully implemented, shall be desegregated by special education status,
English learners, socioeconomic status, gender, and ethnic group.
Only the test scores of pupils who were counted as part of the
enrollment in the annual data collection of the California Basic
Educational Data System for the current fiscal year and who were
continuously enrolled during that year may be included in the test
result reports in the API score of the school.
(F) (i) Commencing with the baseline API calculation in 2016, and
for each year thereafter, results of the achievement test and other
tests specified in subdivision (b) shall constitute no more than 60
percent of the value of the index for secondary schools.
(ii) In addition to the elements required by this paragraph, the
Superintendent, with approval of the state board, may incorporate
into the index for secondary schools valid, reliable, and stable
measures of pupil preparedness for postsecondary education and
career.
(G) Results of the achievement test and other tests specified in
subdivision (b) shall constitute at least 60 percent of the value of
the index for primary schools and middle schools.
(H) It is the intent of the Legislature that the state's system of
public school accountability be more closely aligned with both the
public's expectations for public education and the workforce needs of
the state's economy. It is therefore necessary that the
accountability system evolve beyond its narrow focus on pupil test
scores to encompass other valuable information about school
performance, including, but not limited to, pupil preparedness for
college and career, as well as the high school graduation rates
already required by law.
(I) The Superintendent shall annually determine the accuracy of
the graduation rate data. Notwithstanding any other law, graduation
rates for pupils in dropout recovery high schools shall not be
included in the API. For purposes of this subparagraph, "dropout
recovery high school" means a high school in which 50 percent or more
of its pupils have been designated as dropouts pursuant to the
exit/withdrawal codes developed by the department or left a school
and were not otherwise enrolled in a school for a period of at least
180 days.
(J) To complement the API, the Superintendent, with the approval
of the state board, may develop and implement a program of school
quality review that features locally convened panels to visit
schools, observe teachers, interview pupils, and examine pupil work,
if an appropriation for this purpose is made in the annual Budget
Act.
(K) The Superintendent shall annually provide to local educational
agencies and the public a transparent and understandable explanation
of the individual components of the API and their relative values
within the API.
(L) An additional element chosen by the Superintendent and the
state board for inclusion in the API pursuant to this paragraph shall
not be incorporated into the API until at least one full school year
after the state board's decision to include the element into the
API.
(b) Pupil scores from the following tests, when available and when
found to be valid and reliable for this purpose, shall be
incorporated into the API:
(1) The standards-based achievement tests provided for in Section
60642.5.
(2) The high school exit examination.
(c) Based on the API, the Superintendent shall develop, and the
state board shall adopt, expected annual percentage growth targets
for all schools based on their API baseline score from the previous
year. Schools are expected to meet these growth targets through
effective allocation of available resources. For schools below the
statewide API performance target adopted by the state board pursuant
to subdivision (d), the minimum annual percentage growth target shall
be 5 percent of the difference between the actual API score of a
school and the statewide API performance target, or one API point,
whichever is greater. Schools at or above the statewide API
performance target shall have, as their growth target, maintenance of
their API score above the statewide API performance target. However,
the state board may set differential growth targets based on grade
level of instruction and may set higher growth targets for the lowest
performing schools because they have the greatest room for
improvement. To meet its growth target, a school shall demonstrate
that the annual growth in its API is equal to or more than its
schoolwide annual percentage growth target and that all numerically
significant pupil subgroups, as defined in subdivision (a), are
making comparable improvement.
(d) Upon adoption of state performance standards by the state
board, the Superintendent shall recommend, and the state board shall
adopt, a statewide API performance target that includes consideration
of performance standards and represents the proficiency level
required to meet the state performance target.
(e) (1) A school or school district with 11 to 99 pupils with
valid test scores shall receive an API score with an asterisk that
indicates less statistical certainty than API scores based on 100 or
more test scores.
(2) A school or school district annually shall receive an API
score, unless the Superintendent determines that an API score would
be an invalid measure of the performance of the school or school
district for one or more of the following reasons:
(A) Irregularities in testing procedures occurred.
(B) The data used to calculate the API score of the school or
school district are not representative of the pupil population at the
school or school district.
(C) Significant demographic changes in the pupil population render
year-to-year comparisons of pupil performance invalid.
(D) The department discovers or receives information indicating
that the integrity of the API score has been compromised.
(E) Insufficient pupil participation in the assessments included
in the API.
(F) A transition to new standards-based assessments compromises
comparability of results across schools or school districts. The
Superintendent may use the authority in this subparagraph in the
2013-14 and 2014-15 school years only, with approval of the state
board.
(3) If a school or school district has fewer than 100 pupils with
valid test scores, the calculation of the API or adequate yearly
progress pursuant to the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (20
U.S.C. Sec. 6301 et seq.) and federal regulations may be calculated
over more than one annual administration of the tests administered
pursuant to Section 60640 and the high school exit examination
administered pursuant to Section 60851, consistent with regulations
adopted by the state board.
(4) Any school or school district that does not receive an API
calculated pursuant to subparagraph (F) of paragraph (2) shall not
receive an API growth target pursuant to subdivision (c). Schools and
school districts that do not have an API calculated pursuant to
subparagraph (F) of paragraph (2) shall use one of the following:
(A) The most recent API calculation.
(B) An average of the three most recent annual API calculations.
(C) Alternative measures that show increases in pupil academic
achievement for all groups of pupils schoolwide and among significant
subgroups.
(f) Only schools with 100 or more test scores contributing to the
API may be included in the API rankings.
(g) The Superintendent, with the approval of the state board,
shall develop an alternative accountability system for schools under
the jurisdiction of a county board of education or a county
superintendent of schools, community day schools, nonpublic,
nonsectarian schools pursuant to Section 56366, and alternative
schools serving high-risk pupils, including continuation high schools
and opportunity schools. Schools in the alternative accountability
system may receive an API score, but shall not be included in the API
rankings.
(h) For purposes of this section, county offices of education
shall be considered school districts.
SEC. 3. If the Commission on State Mandates determines that this
act contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to local
agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made pursuant
to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title 2 of
the Government Code.
