Faculty in the nation’s largest public university system agreed to end their historic strike against the California State University system late Monday evening.
The faculty union, which represents more than 29,000 professors, lecturers, librarians and coaches, agreed to a 5% general salary increase retroactive to July 1, 2023, and a 5% general salary increase on July 1, 2024, as long as the state does not reduce Cal State’s base funding this summer.
Monday marked the first day of a planned one-week strike. The system’s nearly 450,000 students saw many of their classes canceled as faculty protested. However, the new agreement means all faculty will return to campuses and their classes on Tuesday.
“The collective action of so many lecturers, professors, counselors, librarians and coaches over these last eight months forced CSU management to take our demands seriously,” said Charles Toombs, president of the California Faculty Association, the union. “This tentative agreement makes major gains for all faculty at the CSU.”
The agreement would raise the salary floor for the lowest paid faculty by increasing minimum pay by about $3,000 retroactive to July 1 and raising it again by $3,000 this summer. It also expands paid parental leave from six to 10 weeks.
Other highlights from the agreement include improved access to gender-inclusive restrooms and lactation spaces, increased protection for faculty who have negative interactions with campus police officers, and additional support for lecturers.
The agreement extends the current contract for 2022-24 one year to June 30, 2025.
“I am extremely pleased and deeply appreciative that we have reached common ground with CFA that will end the strike immediately,” CSU Chancellor Mildred García said. “The agreement enables the CSU to fairly compensate its valued, world-class faculty while protecting the university system’s long-term financial sustainability. With the agreement in place, I look forward to advancing our student-centered work — together — as the nation’s greatest driver of social mobility and the pipeline fueling California’s diverse and educated workforce.”
The university system is encouraging students to look for messages from their instructors about adjusting their classes this week. Faculty will vote to ratify the new agreement in the coming weeks.
“This historic agreement was won because of members’ solidarity, collective action, bravery, and love for each other and our students,” said Antonio Gallo, an instructor on the Northridge campus. “This is what People Power looks like. This deal immensely improves working conditions for faculty and strengthens learning conditions for students.”
Could you navigate the roads without GPS? What about writing an essay error-free? Could you complete that task without spell check? Although many media reports describe artificial intelligence (AI) as a new innovation, it has been around for decades. GPS and spell check are just two examples of how AI is an integral part of the technologies we use on a daily basis.
However, the introduction of ChatGPT shook the world. Possibilities for using generative AI to create content and deliver innovations in many fields and aspects of modern life are being developed and introduced quickly, and they are dramatically changing the way we use information. This is especially true in education.
Students are using AI to complete assignments, teachers are using it to develop lesson plans, and schools are using it to provide individualized support to children. However, there is a lack of clear guidance on the use of AI, which could create new challenges far beyond concerns about cheating, plagiarism and data privacy.
One concern is what we refer to as digital amnesia. People tend to forget information that is easily obtained through search engines. Typically, people search for the same word, concept or fact several times, because for many, the brain does not register the information. This dilemma is known as the “Google effect,” and research shows that this often has a negative impact on one’s ability to retain critical information.
AI could amplify the amnesia of knowledge and skills on a new level. When an artificial intelligence tool is used to complete homework, the knowledge and skills that would have been developed by completing those activities are no longer acquired. Similarly, when AI is used to make problem-solving decisions, the development of critical cognitive skills and intellectual creativity may be put at risk.
The availability of a wide range of AI tools is also raising fundamental questions about what should be taught and emphasized in schools. When calculators were adopted, certain tasks, such as the multiplication and division of large numbers, could be completed efficiently to save time for developing other skills. However, it is still important for students to learn essential arithmetic skills because we know it is foundational to learning more complex math.
For this reason, policymakers and educators must know how the use of AI will affect long-term learning outcomes before it is utilized in the classroom. Without carefully thinking through the consequences of using AI in ways that short-circuit learning, it could produce adverse educational effects that we are presently unable to envision, and it could exacerbate existing inequities.
Responsible integration of AI requires creating opportunities for users to actively engage in learning activities. AI tools can be used to promote creative thinking and problem-solving skills, giving users learning opportunities that deepen engagement and empower them.
We recently documented the possibility of using AI in this way. Through an AI-supported professional development program, we asked math teachers to complete an activity related to their daily teaching tasks and then used an AI tool to analyze their work. The tool identified areas where teachers needed additional support and provided them with activities to acquire the skills needed by asking targeted questions. Teachers learned by doing rather than by simply using AI to show them how to do it. This approach not only improved teachers’ knowledge and skills, it also improved their students’ performance.
This research showed that AI can be used as a teacher’s aide. It can analyze students’ work and identify which students need additional help. It can also suggest evidence-based strategies teachers can use to modify subsequent instruction to meet students’ needs.
As AI tools become more widely available, it is essential that state and district leaders pay close attention to what vendors are selling. Will new AI tools enhance and empower teachers and learners, or will they contribute to passivity? To answer this important question, teachers must be given an opportunity to investigate how these tools will be used to support students before decisions are made.
The second major concern is that teachers and students may begin to over rely on the information provided by AI. Generative AI is based on the data it is trained to assimilate and distill. As we now know, AI makes mistakes that only a well-trained user can identify. The rubrics and data used in AI tools to grade student work, provide guidance on how to address gaps in learning, or to improve student skills, may not be adequate. It could easily reproduce biases and inequities that exist in our schools and society.
To avoid these potential problems, content experts from diverse backgrounds must be involved in the development of AI tools in education. These tools must be vetted carefully by subject matter and pedagogical experts who can provide feedback before they are introduced into classrooms. No AI tool should be used unless protocols for data privacy are well documented and there is real evidence that it will improve teaching and learning
We are not wary or opposed to using AI to enhance learning. In fact, we believe it has tremendous potential to support teachers and empower learners if used correctly. However, policymakers and educators must ask the right questions about its use and take precautionary steps to determine which tools will be helpful and which may harm teaching and learning.
•••
Yasemin Copur-Gencturkis an associate professor at the University of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education and a leading researcher on AI in education.
Pedro Noguera is dean of USC’s Rossier School of Education and a newly appointed member of the U.S. Department of Education’s committee on the use of AI in education.
The opinions expressed in this piece represent those of the authors. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.
He began by saying that he just finished talking to President Macron of France, who said the French were celebrating “our victory” in World War II. Trump scoffed.
Then he said he had a conversation with President Putin. This reminded Trump that the Russians had been our allies in World War II, that they had lost 51 million people fighting the Nazis, and that Putin had fought with them. Yes, Putin himself assured our victory.
So why, he wondered, does everyone now hate Russia, but love Germany and Japan, who were our enemies?
“Macron was a good man. I said ‘what are you doing?’ he goes, uh, ‘we’re celebrating World War Two, our victory.’ I said ‘your victory? heh, your victory. tell me about that.’ and then I called somebody else, and I happened to speak to President Putin at the time. now, in all fairness to him, he lost 51 million people, and he did fight. Russia fought. sort of interesting, isn’t it? he fought with us at World War Two, and everybody hates him. and Germany and Japan, they’re fine, you know? someday, somebody will explain that, but I like Germany and Japan, too. but Putin is a little confused by that, you know? he said ‘we lost 51 million people and we were your ally and now everybody hates Russia, and they love Germany and Japan.’ I said ‘let’s explain that some time, ok?’ it’s a, uh, it’s a strange world.”
Here are a few pointers for Trump:
Stalin and Hitler signed a friendship pact in 1939 (non-aggression pact). Hitler invaded the USSR in 1941. After Hitler’s attack, the USSR became an ally of the anti-Nazis.
Stalin was one of the worst dictators in history. But the UK, other European allies, and the U.S. welcomed him into the alliance against the Nazis.
The Russians had more casualties than any other nation, but not 51 million.
AI summarized the sources:
An estimated 27 million Soviet citizens, including both military personnel and civilians, perished during World War II. This figure represents the highest number of casualties for any nation involved in the war. Of these deaths, around 8.7 to 10.7 million were military personnel, while 10.4 to 13.3 million were civilians. The majority of Soviet citizens who died were civilians.
So, no, 51 million Russians did not die in WWII.
Contrary to Trump, Putin did not fight “with us” in World War II. He was born in 1952.
Why do people hate Russia now–our wartime allies– but love Germany and Japan–iur enemies in World War II?
Most Americans remember that the U.S. and the USSR parted ways after that war. Stalin continued to rule Russia and satellite nations with an iron fist. He was always a brutal dictator who crushed dissent and murdered enemies and banned criticism and sent poets and playwrights into Siberian work camp.
When the USSR collapsed in 1991, western nations and Russian democrats hoped that Russian would shed its authoritarian past and join the western world as a free society.
Meanwhile, Germany and Japan shed their history of fascism and built sturdy democracies (Germany was split in two, with a democratic West Germany and a Soviet-controlled East Germany until the USSR disintegrated in 1991).
Americans today admire Germany and Japan because they are now stable democracies with thriving economies.
Most Americans do not like Putin because he is a dictator who has been in power since 2000 (with a brief power when he was the shadow leader), and the Russian parliament has extended his term to 2036.
Putin disappears his rivals. They are murdered in broad daylight, or mysteriously fall out of buildings, or are poisoned, or–like Alexei Navalny–die of unknown causes in remote prisons. No free press. No free speech. No dissent permitted.
AI summary of deaths attributed to Stalin:
Estimates of the number of people who died under Stalin’s rule range from 10 to 30 million, with most historians agreeing on a figure around 20 million. This includes both intentional killings and deaths due to starvation, forced labor, and neglect.
Elaboration:
Estimates Vary:Different sources provide varying estimates, reflecting the difficulty in compiling accurate data from the Soviet archives.
Official Records:Declassified Soviet archives revealed official records of executions, Gulag deaths, and deaths related to forced resettlement and deportations, totaling around 3.3 million.
Soviet Famine:The Holodomor, a man-made famine in the 1930s, resulted in the deaths of millions, with estimates ranging from 5.5 to 6.5 million. (Ukraine)
“Purposive” vs. Neglect:Historian Stephen Wheatcroft estimates that around 1 million of the deaths were intentional, while the rest resulted from neglect and irresponsibility.
Context Matters:It’s important to remember that Stalin’s policies led to widespread suffering and death, not just through executions but also through starvation, forced labor, and the overall repressive nature of his regime.
If Trump liked to read (he doesn’t), I would recommend that he read The Black Book of Communism, written by French historians.
If others can explain better to Trump why most Americans don’t like Putin, please add your thoughts.
Gov. Gavin Newsom announces his 2024-25 state budget proposal, including his plans to deal with a projected deficit in Sacramento on Jan. 10.. Credit: Brontë Wittpenn / San Francisco Chronicle / Polaris
Gov. Gavin Newsom buoyed the hopes of school district and community college educators this month when, despite a sizable three-year decline in state revenue, he promised to protect schools and colleges from cuts and to uphold future spending commitments.
They might want to hold their applause until after the last act, when the Legislature passes the 2024-25 budget in June.
In an analysis of the state budget, the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) cautioned that there are questions about how Newsom plans to close $8 billion of a huge revenue shortfall facing schools and community colleges.
Beyond meeting this challenge, the LAO also urged legislators to start planning for education spending beyond 2024-25, when flat or declining revenues are expected to raise difficult financial choices. They could pit funding of ongoing expenses against sustaining ambitious programs like summer and after-school programs for low-income students, additional community schools, money for teacher training in early literacy and math, and confronting post-pandemic learning setbacks.
“The state faces significant operating deficits in the coming years, which are the result of lower revenue estimates, as well as increased cost pressures,” the analyst said.
But the immediate enigma is Newsom’s strategy for the $8 billion.
Newsom is projecting that state revenues to run schools and community colleges will be short $14.3 billion over three years: the budget year that ended in 2022-23, the current budget year of 2023-24, and the coming year. That number is calculated as revenue through Proposition 98, the formula that determines the proportion of the state’s general fund that must be spent on schools and community colleges — about 40%.
Proposition 98 revenues are sometimes close but never exactly what a governor and the Legislature assume when they approve a budget. Revenues for the past and current years exceed or fall short of what they projected and not what they predict for the year ahead.
Budget analysts were particularly handicapped when calculating the 2023-24 budget. They didn’t anticipate the shortfall from 2022-23 and didn’t discover it until fall 2023, because of a six-month delay in the filing deadline for 2022 tax returns.
Newsom is proposing to divert $5.7 billion from the Proposition 98 rainy day fund to fill in the current year’s deficit as well as what’s needed to sustain a flat budget, plus a small cost of living increase, for 2024-25. Draining the rainy day fund would require the Legislature’s OK.
The remainder — and biggest piece — is the $9 billion revenue shortfall from 2022-23, which would be $8 billion after other automatic adjustments. That shortfall is technically an overpayment beyond the statutory minimum Proposition 98 funding guarantee. It fell dramatically from what the Legislature adopted in June 2022 to $98.3 billion that revenue actually produced. The biggest decline was in income tax receipts on the top 1% of earners.
School districts have already spent funding from 2022–23,including on staff pay raises that they negotiated with good faith estimates. Newsom and the Legislature could try to deduct that overpayment from the current and 2024-25 budgets, but such a move “would be devastating for students and staff,” Patti Herrera, vice president of the school consulting firm California School Services, told a workshop last week with more than 1,000 school district administrators in Sacramento.
As an alternative, Newsom proposes to find reductions from the non-Proposition 98 side of the general fund, which covers higher education, child care and all other non-education expenses, from prisons to climate change programs.
“We are super grateful there will be no attempts to claw back” the money given to school districts in a past year’s budget, Herrera said.
Newsom’s challenge is to make districts and community colleges financially whole without increasing the minimum Proposition 98 guarantee. Raising Proposition 98 could create a bigger obligation in the future, including potential deficits after 2024-25 — unless the Legislature raises taxes, a nonstarter in an election year.
How Newsom is going to do this is a mystery. The one-sentence reference to it in his budget summary says only, “The Budget proposes statutory changes to address roughly $8 billion of this decrease to avoid impacting existing LEA (school districts) and community college district budgets.”
Both the LAO and School Services said it’s their understanding from the Department of Finance that the payments from the general fund to cover the Proposition 98 overpayment would be made over five years, starting in 2025-26.
“We have some questions about that proposal. Probably the most pressing one is how is the state going to use revenue that it’s not going to collect for several years to address a funding shortfall that exists right now,” said Ken Kapphahn, the LAO’s principal fiscal and policy analyst for TK-12 education.
The questions are legal and political. The proposed statutory language, which may be released in a trailer bill in the coming weeks, will reveal how the state Department of Finance will finesse postponing balancing the 2022-23 budget that’s $8 billion out of kilter. Budget hearings next week in the Capitol may indicate how receptive legislative leaders are to further reducing general fund spending, which also is feeling a financial squeeze.
A search for the extra $8 billion
Additionally, Newsom is proposing several billion dollars of accounting maneuvers that will book spending in 2024-25 but delay and defer payments for programs and some state salaries until early 2025-26. Included are $500 million in deferred reimbursements to the University of California and California State University for the 5% budget increase that Newsom committed to funding in 2024-25.
“Many of these solutions involve moving costs to next year. That is one reason we have the state looking at a large deficit, not just this year, but the following year,” Kapphahn said. “I can’t recall another situation quite like this.”
Barring a recession, which neither LAO nor the Newsom administration is forecasting, both Newsom and the administration are projecting general fund deficits averaging about $30 billion annually in the three years after 2024-25. Pushing the $8 billion solution for the 2022-23 Proposition 98 deficit, along with other general fund delays and deferrals into those years will compound difficult choices, according to the LAO.
“Overall, the governor’s budget runs the risk of understating the degree of fiscal pressure facing the state in the future,” the LAO analysis said.
The LAO suggested other options for resolving the 2022-23 deficit. It recommended applying the remaining $3.8 billion from the Proposition 98 reserve fund that Newsom hasn’t touched and looking for reductions in unallocated one-time funding such as an unused $1 billion for community schools and canceling $500 million for electric school buses.
Even with no cuts to Proposition 98 next year, many school districts and charter schools will likely face their own deficits in 2024-25. That’s because the projected cost-of-living adjustment for next year will not be enough to cover the loss of revenue from declining enrollments. The COLA, tied to a federal formula measuring goods and services bought by state and local governments and not consumer products, is currently projected to be 0.76%; it would be the lowest increase in 40 years, with one exception, the year after the Great Recession, in 2009. This would come on the heels of two years of near record-high COLAs of 6.6% and 8.2%.
The analyst’s office projects the COLA may inch up to 1% by June, when the budget is set. At that rate, a hypothetical school district with 10,000 students would see declining revenues with an enrollment decline of only about 100 students.
Paso Robles Joint Unified School District in San Luis Obispo County, with about 6,000 students, is among those with declining enrollment since the pandemic. As a result, the district, with about 800 full-time employees, anticipates a reduction of five full-time staff members in 2024-25 and perhaps 40 layoff notices the following year, said Brad Pawlowski, the assistant superintendent for business services.
Pawlowski said he came away encouraged after School Services’ presentation that schools will be spared cuts in the next budget, while acknowledging it’s a long time between now and the budget’s adoption.
“We have seen a common message between the governor and the Legislature to protect education. And that does make me feel good,” he said. But doing so, he added, “will mean finding other ways to make that up outside of Prop. 98. That’s going to be the real challenge.”
Eva Levenson, now a sophomore at Berkeley High School, has struggled with dyslexia since childhood but private phonics-based intervention made a difference. “I don’t understand what’s in the way of making a shift when, both in other states and locally, districts are able to help kids now,” she recently told the school board. “How is it possible we aren’t doing it in Berkeley right now?”
Credit: Ximena Natera / Berkeleyside / CatchLight
This story is a collaboration between EdSource and Berkeleyside, a nonprofit online newsroom covering the city of Berkeley. EdSource Reporter John Fensterwald contributed to this report.
How kids are taught to read in Berkeley is slowly starting to shift.
Teachers are studying the science of reading. More students are learning phonics, sounding out words by letters and syllables. And the school district is screening every student to flag those who may have dyslexia, a learning disorder that causes difficulty with reading, writing and spelling.
But these changes didn’t come easily. They are the result of a federal class-action lawsuit, filed in 2017, by four families of Berkeley students with dyslexia who claimed the district failed to teach them how to read.
And though the suit settled in 2021, the district’s method of teaching reading, a balanced literacy curriculum developed by Columbia University Teachers College professor Lucy Calkins called Units of Study, remains in place.
Rather than teaching students to sound out letters, the curriculum relies on a method called three-cueing — where students use context clues like pictures to figure out words — that has now been discredited and banned in several states. Some Berkeley teachers still use cueing, while others have dropped the practice.
Now, the wheels are just beginning to turn in a district long devoted to Calkins. Advocates hope that aligning with the science of reading will help close one of the largest achievement gaps in the country — last year, 26% of Black students in Berkeley schools met state standards in reading, compared with 83% of white students.
“Historically, Berkeley has been — and is — widely known for being a balanced literacy district,” Superintendent Enikia Ford Morthel said during a November panel discussion referring to the Calkins teaching method.
Enikia Ford Morthel, Berkeley schools superintendent, right.Credit: Kelly Sullivan / Berkeleyside
“What we want to be known for is being a district that is disrupting the narrative, disrupting persistent trends and data and really responding to our students,” she said. “This is not just another initiative. This truly is an imperative.”
Some students and parents aren’t yet convinced. Without a firm commitment to adopt a curriculum rooted in the science of reading, they are skeptical that they will see all the changes they believe are long overdue.
“At some point, you have to take responsibility,” said Rebecca Levenson, a parent of two children with dyslexia. Levenson wasn’t part of the lawsuit against the district, but she believes “it’s important for parents who see their children suffer to use their voice and power to make a difference for other families that are in that same situation.”
The Berkeley lawsuit was the second filed in California in 2017 over literacy instruction. In the other suit, the public-interest law firm Public Counsel charged on behalf of students in the lowest-performing schools that California had failed to meet their constitutional right to read. Under a $50 million settlement in 2020, 75 schools received funding and assistance to improve reading instruction. They were encouraged, but not mandated, to select instruction based on the science of reading.
While a district review of its elementary school literacy curriculum found that Units of Study failed to teach foundational literacy skills like phonics and vocabulary, Ford Morthel has stopped short of calling on the district to drop Lucy Calkins. The district is now beginning the process of adopting a new curriculum for the fall of 2025.
At a recent school board meeting, George Ellis, the court-appointed monitor, hammered home the importance of changing the Calkins curriculum. Without a “sound, comprehensive” core curriculum, he said, “it doesn’t matter what interventions we’re really providing, because we’re just filling up holes all over the place, and we’re never going to get caught up here.”
Attorneys and advocates hope the Berkeley lawsuit will spur other school districts to act faster to avoid legal action, accelerating the adoption of the science of reading in California and across the country. But Berkeley’s experience also demonstrates just how many barriers stand in the way of changing reading instruction.
Berkeley’s reading guru
When Lucy Calkins developed her approach in the 1990s, the balanced literacy teaching method was heralded as a new philosophy of education. Rather than teaching from rigid phonics textbooks, teachers introduced students to an entire library of independent books with the goal of teaching kids to love reading.
Calkins was the “guru of reading for people in Berkeley,” said Maggie Riddle, a former teacher and principal at Berkeley’s Jefferson Elementary, now called Ruth Acty. Once Calkins’ approach came to Berkeley, phonics came to be seen as a rote, old-school way of teaching, “dumbing down” instruction. “Berkeley was anti-phonics. One hundred percent,” Riddle said.
Berkeley wasn’t alone in this. Balanced literacy once enjoyed nearly universal popularity. “It was being used in every single Bay Area district,” said Deborah Jacobson, a special education attorney who brought the suit, a federal class action, against the Berkeley district seven years ago.
Special education attorney Deborah Jacobson, photographed at home on this month, brought up the federal class action lawsuit against the Berkeley school district in 2017. Credit: Ximena Natera / Berkeleyside / CatchLight
But the approach has fallen under fire amid a national reckoning over reading instruction, with a consensus growing that balanced literacy goes against what we know about how the brain works when learning to read.
This understanding anchors the science of reading, an approach backed by decades of exhaustive scientific research that suggests most children need systematic lessons in phonics, or how to sound out words, as well as other fundamentals, such as building knowledge and vocabulary, to learn to read. Teaching foundational reading skills especially benefits English learners. Advocates say reading is a civil right and phonics helps bring social justice to Black students.
More than half of states have passed laws requiring schools to align with research-based methods or favoring phonics. In September, Columbia University cut ties with the Reading and Writing Project that Calkins led for decades, citing the need to seek out new perspectives. Calkins herself has revised her curriculum to incorporate more explicit instruction in phonics and phonemic awareness.
A decade ago, California adopted a framework for K-12 literacy that encouraged districts to use evidence-based reading instruction, now commonly called the science of reading. But it wasn’t required, and the state didn’t push districts to adopt it.
Still, advocates say these changes don’t go far enough. The California Early Literacy Coalition plans to sponsor legislation that would create a comprehensive state literacy plan, mandating training in the science of reading for all teachers, not just new ones, and requiring the use of textbooks rooted in the approach.
In Berkeley, lawsuit cast a light
When Berkeley Unified was sued in 2017, Riddle said she saw it as an opportunity. She had moved up through the ranks to become head of K-8 schools and led legal negotiations for the district for two years. “Nobody ever wants the district to be sued, but it cast a light on the needs of kids in reading, especially kids with dyslexia,” Riddle said.
Not everyone saw it that way. It took five years to reach a settlement agreement, and the district’s core curriculum was a sticking point in negotiations. “The resistance was serious, but the lawsuit was serious, too,” recalled Riddle. During negotiations, the district implemented Fast Track Phonics to get phonics instruction into classrooms, but advocates criticized the decision as putting a Band-Aid on a broken system, leaving the core Calkins curriculum intact.
Berkeley signed the settlement agreement in 2021, but due to the pandemic, didn’t start working on implementation until the following year, extending the three-year plan until 2025. Initially, Ellis, the court monitor, criticized the school district and its board for failing to embrace the settlement. And in February, Jacobson said the district had breached the settlement agreement by moving too slowly, but decided not to file a notice in court after district leaders promised action.
In the last year and a half, the district has started taking steps toward the science of reading.
Elementary teachers did a book study of “Shifting the Balance,” an introduction to science of reading practices. The district implemented a universal screening system to flag students who might have dyslexia and started training literacy coaches to implement phonics-based intervention programs like Orton-Gillingham and Heggerty. The district also established a new department of curriculum and instruction, hired a districtwide literacy specialist, and began developing a multi-tiered system of support for struggling readers.
The district’s new focus has made a huge difference for some teachers, even those with decades of experience.
Angélica Pérez, a reading specialist at Thousand Oaks Elementary, said though she has known about phonics for years and even taught it, only recently has she received the systematic training she needed to implement it well with struggling readers.
In my 26 years in education and 15 years in the classroom, I wasn’t so aware of the importance of phonemic awareness.
Angélica Pérez, a reading specialist at Thousand Oaks Elementary in Berkeley.
The changes have won over some of the district’s critics, including Jacobson. “There is a new sense of urgency with the new administration and a new level of commitment,” Jacobson said. “Every year the light bulb seems to go on, more and more.”
Angélica Pérez’s reading room at Thousand Oaks Elementary School allows children to explore leisure reading. A longtime reading specialist, Pérez uses a phonics and phonemics curriculum to help struggling students. Credit: Ximena Natera / Berkeleyside / CatchLight
They have also earned the praise of the teachers union president. “There is a systematic plan to make sure our teachers are getting what they need so they can do their jobs best,” said Matt Meyer, president of the Berkeley Federation of Teachers.
Cost to students of the lengthy legal fight
For families whose children struggle with reading, Berkeley’s decades-long commitment to balanced literacy came at a price. Many students with dyslexia have either missed out on learning, or their parents have paid thousands of dollars in private tutoring to catch them up.
“After a certain point, the research shows that it becomes unrecoverable,” said Eliza Noh, a Berkeley parent who has a child with dyslexia. “The early years for teaching people how to read are critical.”
Levenson’s two children, Eva Levenson and Wen Dolphin, both have dyslexia and attended Berkeley schools 18 years apart. But Eva received private reading intervention, while Wen did not. The family says their experience shows the difference phonics-based intervention can make.
Rebecca Levenson and her youngest daughter,Eva, talk in their West Berkeley home. Levenson’s two children, Eva and Wen, who is in his late 20s and lives in Colorado, have struggled with dyslexia throughout their academic careers. Credit: Ximena Natera / Berkeleyside / CatchLight
Dolphin dropped out of school at 15, while Eva, now a sophomore at Berkeley High, is taking the same challenging classes as her peers. She began writing for The Jacket, Berkeley High’s student newspaper, and in October, penned an article about the Calkins curriculum.
“I know that my life trajectory could have been very different if I would have had the support that I needed in those really formative years,” Dolphin told a crowd at a Berkeley school board meeting last year.
When Lindsay Nofelt’s son was diagnosed with dyslexia, she shelled out thousands of dollars on a phonics-based intensive reading intervention program. Her son’s reading ability improved quickly, but what took Nofelt longer to piece together was Berkeley’s role in her son’s story.
Even after listening to Emily Hanford’s podcast “Sold a Story,” which thrust Calkins’ curriculum into the spotlight, she didn’t connect the literacy debate to Berkeley schools.
“I thought, if Emily Hanford is writing about this and sounds like it’s not serving the needs of the students, then there’s no way that Berkeley Unified school system would use such a discredited curriculum,” Nofelt said.
Students relax at lunchtime at Willard Middle School in Berkeley in August 2022. Credit: Ximena Natera / Berkeleyside/ CatchLight
But over time, Nofelt realized her son wasn’t the only one in Berkeley struggling with reading. As she learned more about the science of reading and the class-action lawsuit, she realized that the kind of reading instruction Hanford was describing in her podcast was happening in Berkeley. “When I found out they were one and the same, all of the pieces fell into place,” she said.
Two years ago, Nofelt formed Reading for Berkeley to educate parents about early literacy and give them resources to advocate for their children. It’s now a resource that Nofelt wishes she had when she was trying to help her son — digestible content designed to help families ask questions about their children’s literacy education and support their reading abilities.
Today, students with dyslexia and their parents are watching Berkeley closely, their hope resting on the district’s commitment to the science of reading.
At a recent school board meeting in January, Eva Levenson told the Berkeley school board directors and superintendent that she is still waiting to see a plan that addresses the failure of the district’s core curriculum.
“I don’t understand what’s in the way of making a shift when, both in other states and locally, districts are able to help kids now. How is it possible we aren’t doing it in Berkeley right now?”
Hundreds of UC Berkeley students walked out of class on Oct. 25, calling for a cease-fire in Gaza. The students are among thousands who have walked out on campuses nationwide as fighting between Israel and Hamas continues in Gaza.
Credit: Brontë Wittpenn/San Francisco Chronicle/Polaris
This story was updated to reflect the UC board’s decision to table a vote on the issue.
University of California faculty and other staff could be banned from publishing political statements, including those stemming from the Israel-Hamas war, on university websites and other university channels under a policy brought to UC’s board of regents.
The consideration of such a policy comes after some units, including at least two ethnic studies departments, posted statements on their websites last fall supporting Palestine and condemning Israel.
The proposal is causing an uproar among some faculty who say it would repress their academic freedom and question how it would be enforced.
UC officials behind the idea say it is necessary to ensure that the opinions of certain individuals or groups of faculty aren’t mistaken for the opinions of UC as a whole.
“When individual or group viewpoints or opinions on matters not directly related to the official business of the unit are posted on these administrative websites, it creates the potential that the statements and opinions will be mistaken as the position of the institution itself,” regent Jay Sures, who helped develop the proposal as chair of the regents’ compliance and audit committee, said during Wednesday’s regents meeting.
The regents won’t vote on the policy until March at the earliest. They initially planned to take action this week but opted to table the vote until their next meeting, scheduled for March 19 through 21, after the item caused much confusion and debate when discussed Wednesday evening.
The effort is the latest fallout from the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by Hamas and Israel’s military response in Gaza, which has triggered sharp responses from pro- and anti-Israel groups.
The policy does not specifically mention any particular issue, but some faculty see it as an attempt to prevent them from discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Since the fall, the website for UC Santa Cruz’s critical race and ethnic studies department has displayed a statement calling on “scholars, researchers, organizers, and administrators worldwide” to take action “to end Israel’s genocidal attack on Gaza.” The website for UC San Diego’s ethnic studies department includes several statements and commentaries. One statement says the ethnic studies community at UC San Diego supports Palestinian people and their “freedom from an apartheid system that seeks to dehumanize them in unconscionable ways.”
Sures last fall also sharply criticized a letter by the UC Ethnic Studies Council. In the letter, the council said official UC communications denouncing Hamas for its Oct. 7 attack on Israel distorted and misrepresented “the unfolding genocide of Palestinians in Gaza and thereby contribute to the racist and dehumanizing erasure of Palestinian daily reality.” Sures wrote a public response to the council saying the letter “is rife with falsehoods about Israel and seeks to legitimize and defend the horrific savagery of the Hamas massacre.”
One regent, Hadi Makarechian, acknowledged during Wednesday’s regents meeting that the regents were considering the issue because “some people were making some political statements” related to Palestine and Hamas.
Christine Hong, a professor of critical race and ethnic studies at UC Santa Cruz, said during the public comment portion of the meeting that the regents are attempting to “repress academic freedom” and disallow “any critical study or discussion of Palestine.”
“Your emissary, regent Jay Sures, declared war on ethnic studies,” Hong added.
Sures maintained Wednesday that the policy isn’t meant to impede free speech and that he believes there “are many avenues” for faculty to share their viewpoints.
“I’m not so sure that it needs to go on the landing pages of departmental websites,” he said.
The final language of the policy that the regents could vote on isn’t yet known. According to their agenda, regents were scheduled to vote Wednesday on a policy stating that “official channels of communication, including the main landing pages of websites, of schools, departments, centers, units, and other entities should not be used for purposes of publicly expressing the personal or collective opinions of unit members or of the entity.”
That language was criticized for being too ambiguous, including by two key UC law professors who urged the regents to reject the proposal. The professors — Ty Alper of UC Berkeley and Brian Soucek of UC Davis — each previously served terms as chair of the UC Academic Senate’s university committee on academic freedom. As chairs, they helped develop a 2022 recommendation by the Senate that faculty departments should be allowed to issue opinionated statements.
In a letter to the regents, Alper and Soucek said the proposed policy “raises more questions than it settles.” Do official channels include a department’s social media pages, even though those aren’t UC-hosted websites? Do emails sent by a dean or department chair count as official channels? Are faculty departments violating the policy if they were to sign a public statement hosted on a website not operated by UC?
Acknowledging that the language was indeed ambiguous, UC staff during the meeting amended it and presented two different options to regents. Under the first option, faculty departments would be banned from expressing opinions only on the “main landing pages” of university websites. The second option featured language that would extend the ban beyond the landing pages and to other websites, at the discretion of a university administrator.
But those options also caused confusion and debate among regents and UC officials.
“Even if it’s not on the main landing page, if someone says, this is the official viewpoint of Department X on this political issue, I think you could interpret some of this language to say, we also don’t want people to do that,” Howard Gillman, the chancellor of UC Irvine, said Wednesday while addressing the regents.
Some regents and officials also suggested that the policy include language that university departments should have designated opinion pages on their websites, and that any political statements or other opinions should be limited to existing on those pages.
Sures agreed to work overnight with fellow regent Lark Park and UC’s general counsel, Charles Robinson, to further revise the policy and return Thursday with a new action item. On Thursday, however, the regents agreed to table the item until March following a motion by regent John Pérez.
“Issues of First Amendment protection are crucial to the institution. I am supportive of the concept that we’re trying to get through here. After looking at the product of work that’s come forward, I don’t think we’ve got enough to act on in a meaningful way, in a way that’s defensible to the core mission of the university. I think we would benefit from more input,” Pérez said.
By possibly banning faculty departments from making political statements, UC’s new policy could run counter to the 2022 Academic Senate recommendation, some faculty say. At that time, the Senate’s academic council and university committee on academic freedom agreed that “departments should not be precluded from issuing or endorsing statements in the name of the department,” noting that freedom of expression as well as academic freedom are “core tenets of the UC educational mission.” The Senate took up the issue after UCLA’s Asian American studies department published a statement expressing solidarity with Palestinians and denouncing Israel.
In a social media statement Wednesday, the Berkeley Faculty Association said the idea to ban departments from making political statements was already considered and rejected by the Academic Senate in 2022. The faculty association also questioned how the new policy would be enforced and urged the regents to reject it.
“Who gets to decide what is a political statement and who will be responsible for policing the websites and social media accounts of academic units? We urge the Regents not to approve a dangerously ambiguous policy which raises alarming questions about governance and academic freedom,” the faculty association wrote.
This story has been corrected to say that 50% of senators must be present and 75% must vote to remove the president, according to the bylaws.
The Fresno City College community continues to reel from an EdSource report revealing that Tom Boroujeni, a tenured communication arts instructor and president of the school’s academic senate, was found to have committed an “act of sexual violence” against a professor and colleague at nearby Fresno State in 2015.
The fallout was laid bare during Wednesday’s academic senate meeting when several professors challenged the body’s leadership, criticizing the executive board and demanding change, despite a plea by the acting president that attendants not use the public comment period to “prosecute this (Boroujeni) case or any other case.”
Because of his administrative leave status, Boroujeni, through a request handled by Fresno City College President Robert Pimentel, asked if, and or how he could speak during Wednesday meeting.
He didn’t show up, but the possibility that he would be at the meeting galvanized many of his colleagues. His absence did not prevent discussions about him, his case and the conduct of the academic senate, which he led.
“You are our faculty leaders; we look to you for guidance in matters related to us,” communication arts instructor Kherstin Khan said at the meeting. “Your silence in the face of controversy has exacerbated the division of faculty and left many of the people that you represent feeling alienated and marginalized.”
As Boroujeni remains on leave, Jackie Williams, president-elect and now acting president, asked those who wished to speak during the meeting’s open forum to focus only on concerns about academic and professional matters pertaining to issues concerning faculty, curriculum and their work.
“We are here to work on the matters that are on the agenda,” Williams said.
She told EdSource that she believes in confidentiality for victims, whom she supports, but doesn’t believe that anyone’s personnel matters should be discussed in a public forum.
“I have witnessed firsthand how the investigations of assault can be revictimizing and traumatizing, not just to the survivor of that incident but to other survivors and those that are close to them,” she said. “I firmly support, for that reason, matters being kept confidential and being handled by the appropriate legal and human resource experts unless a survivor chooses to share their story.”
However, she did not stop people from speaking out about Boroujeni or the Fresno State case. She declined to comment on their criticism of the executive board.
What does Fresno State case entail?
Boroujeni has taught at Fresno City College since 2015, the same year he began his academic career at Fresno State while still a graduate student. The alleged victim is also a professor and Boroujeni’s colleague at the city college. The State Center Community College District, parent agency to Fresno City College, learned of the sexual misconduct investigation when the alleged victim requested a no-contact order, which was granted in the spring semester of 2022.
Fresno State opened the investigation based on the federal anti-discrimination law known as Title IX, records show. The investigation determined that Boroujeni committed the sexual violence in 2015. At the time of the incident, Boroujeni was a part-time instructor at Fresno City College while finishing a master’s degree at Fresno State, records show.
Fresno State couldn’t discipline him because he was a graduate student when the alleged violence occurred, Debbie Adishian-Astone, Fresno State’s vice president for administration, told EdSource. Boroujeni resigned from Fresno State in 2022 after officials said the act-of-sexual-violence report would be placed in his personnel file.
The Fresno State case was not taken into account as Boroujeni was elected senate president at Fresno City College and achieved tenure in 2023, even after the community college district investigated the alleged victim’s request for a stay-away order and found that sexual violence occurred.
Fresno State released a redacted copy of the report to EdSource under the state’s Public Records Act, explaining, “Given that Mr. Boroujeni remains active in the educational community and is teaching at a local community college, there is strong public interest in knowing that a college instructor has been previously found to have committed an act of sexual violence at another university.”
Academic senate presidency
In May 2023, Boroujeni started a two-year term as Fresno City College’s academic senate president. In that role, Boroujeni works with the school’s administration in setting academic policy and hiring faculty. He assumed the academic senate presidency after a two-year term as president-elect — a rule that doesn’t seem to work, said Tiffany Sarkisian, Fresno City College’s program review coordinator and a communication arts instructor.
Sarkisian urged the executive board to create a task force to investigate the efficacy of its bylaws, which she said need to be updated by changing its nomination process, voting procedures and board duties.
Williams said the executive board has been reviewing its bylaws in light of the situation.
“We’re going through every line and addressing some things that we have found that were silent in the bylaws and came up because of this,” she said.
The bylaws only address the resignation or removal of an officer, not what to do when an officer is on leave. According to the bylaws, removing an officer requires a written petition detailing the rationale for the removal, with signatures from 25% of the academic senators; 50% of the senators must be present and 75% must vote to remove the president.
Anthropology professor German Loffler submitted a petition in December, calling for Boroujeni’s removal, according to Williams. Loffler has since withdrawn the petition.
“We do not have an active petition; that’s one mechanism that would open the conversation,” Williams said. “We’re not aware of another mechanism, but if it’s appropriate to place it on the agenda as a discussion item, we can do that.”
Boroujeni’s case has divided Fresno City College community
Even though the community college district has placed Boroujeni on leave and launched an investigation, some faculty members expect more from the district, the college and the State Center Federation of Teachers, the union representing faculty.
For example, some professors in the district called for union leaders to be transparent about their knowledge of the sexual misconduct findings at Fresno State while others expected the union to take a position on the case.
For instance, Liz Romero, an early childhood education instructor at Clovis Community College, told EdSource it was “disheartening” that the union, through its statement, said their responsibility was to “defend the contract” and “defend the faculty’s rights to due process.”
There have been heated union discussions among a divided faculty.
On Dec. 4, the union censured Clovis Community College philosophy instructor Michael Stannard for his conduct during a discussion of the Boroujeni case at a Dec. 1 union meeting, according to union representative David Campos. The district also announced on Dec. 15 that it is investigating allegations of “inappropriate behavior” by many unnamed employees who allegedly made several female employees “feel unsafe” during union meetings.
Boroujeni requested to speak first during the public comment period on Wednesday and then be escorted off campus by police during a brief recess. The executive board declined the request, Williams said.
Boroujeni published a blog post on Medium focused on “reclaiming my narrative” on Jan. 10. The nearly 8,000-word post casts Boroujeni as the victim of sexual harassment at the hands of the alleged victim as well as racism and stereotyping because of his Middle Eastern background.
Some of his colleagues, including communication arts instructor Jerry Thurston, say they believe the alleged victim.
“When women share their experiences, I believe them,” Thurston said.
“I don’t gullibly swallow anything people say, but when women tell me that someone has behaved inappropriately toward them, explaining what happened, I believe that that thing happened to them. I believe my female colleagues when they tell me someone has mistreated them.”
EdSource reporter Thomas Peele contributed to this story.
Immigrant students at UC and their allies rallied last spring in support of a proposal to allow the university to hire immigrant students who lack permission to be in the U.S.
Michael Burke/EdSource
This story has been updated with additional quotes.
The University of California will not allow the hiring of undocumented students for jobs on its campuses, disappointing students who pushed for the right to be employed without legal status.
Allowing those students to work campus jobs would have been “the right thing to do” but presented too many legal risks and thus was “not viable,” said Michael Drake, the system’s president, while addressing UC’s board of regents Thursday.
Drake cited several possible legal ramifications. He said the university could be “subject to civil fines, criminal penalties, or debarment from federal contracting,” while human resources staff could face prosecution if they “knowingly participate in hiring practices deemed impermissible under federal law.” He also suggested that undocumented students and their families could face prosecution or even deportation.
“I know that many in our community will be disappointed that we are unable to take immediate action. As an individual, I would like nothing more than to do so right here, right now, because it is the right thing to do,” he added. “However, we have a fiduciary responsibility to consider all possible ramifications of our actions.”
The regents voted to suspend consideration of the policy for one year. Some regents against the motion said it could be even more difficult to implement the policy a year from now, alluding to the possibility that former President Donald Trump could be back in office.
In not moving forward with the proposal, the regents “let us down today,” said Jeffry Umaña Muñoz, a UCLA undergraduate student and one of the undocumented students who organized the movement advocating for the proposal. There are more than 4,000 undocumented students across UC’s 10 campuses.
“Our classmates can apply for any job on campus, helping them not only get by financially on a daily basis but also advancing their careers, while we remain forced to rely on incredibly limited resources,” he added in a statement. “I’m deeply disappointed that the UC Regents and President Drake shirked their duties to the students they are supposed to protect and support. We as UC students deserve so much more from our university leadership.”
Several regents voted against the measure to suspend considering the policy: Keith Ellis, Jose Hernandez, John Pérez, Gregory Sarris, student regent Merhawi Tesfai and Tony Thurmond. Thurmond is an ex-officio member of the regents in his role as the state’s superintendent of public instruction. Ellis, an alumni regent, is also an ex-officio member.
A coalition of undocumented students and legal scholars started urging UC more than a year ago to allow the hiring of undocumented students. They argued that UC is permitted to do so, saying the university as a state entity is exempt from a 1986 federal statute banning the hiring of immigrants without legal status.
Pérez said Thursday that he couldn’t “think of a moment where I’ve been more disappointed sitting around this board.” Pérez was appointed as a regent in 2014 and served a one-year term as chair of the board beginning in 2019.
“We have gotten so focused on the question of what the law clearly says today, that we’re losing sight of the moral imperative of what the law should be interpreted as being,” he said. “Some of us may discount the analysis by some of our greatest legal scholars and suggest that it is just an academic exercise on what is legally permissible. But if we don’t challenge, if we don’t push, we won’t know.”
The regents’ decision Thursday comes after Politico reported Wednesday that officials in President Joe Biden’s administration privately opposed the proposal and warned UC of possible legal ramifications, even threatening that the administration could sue.
In response to a question from EdSource seeking confirmation of the Politico report, a UC spokesperson said the university “regularly engages with local, state, and federal partners on numerous issues concerning public education and for maintaining compliance with existing federal law.” The spokesperson added, though, that UC “will not characterize the nature of those discussions.”
After hours of test taking last May, Karen Ramirez perked up when she saw a district leader and a camera crew walking onto her high school campus.
She had a hunch good news awaited.
Her instincts were right — then-17-year-old Ramirez was about to learn she had been elected as LAUSD’s student board member.
“I turned around, and I was like, ‘Wait, I think this means something happened,’” Ramirez, a senior at the Girls Academic Leadership Academy, said. “Eventually, I walked into my classroom because they brought cameras to film my reaction, and that’s when it hit. I was like, ‘Oh my goodness, I think I got it!’”
Since launching her campaign last February, Ramirez has made it her mission to promote student leadership across the district and to support the district’s Latino community.
“I know this is a position that not every student has in the district,” she said. “And to be able to be the one to experience all this, I feel very privileged.”
A path to the board
Ramirez’s path to LAUSD’s school board began when she was in the eighth grade and on LAUSD’s Superintendent’s Student Advisory Council, a group that meets with the superintendent several times each year to provide student input on the district’s efforts.
“I thought it would be a really nice idea to get an insider’s perspective into what’s going on,” Ramirez said. “Being able to see how (the committee has) evolved has definitely been an amazing thing.”
Ramirez has remained on the Superintendent’s Student Advisory Council since, tallying up nearly five years of district leadership. Being part of the board, she said, has been a “constant” in her educational journey.
One day during her junior year, an older mentor on the advisory council told her about the student position on the Los Angeles Unified School District board, and Ramirez’s campaign began.
“I started off just kind of thinking ‘Oh, OK, I just want to see what happens next,’ but then, as I got involved in the campaign process and started seeing how many students I would actually be representing in the district, that’s when it really became such a big passion for me,” she said.
“I know that my representation on the school board is something that is pretty big, especially for the Latino community.”
Last April, following an application and interview process, the district posted introductions to each of the position’s 10 finalists on its Instagram account, along with a brief speech made by each. Students then had two weeks to vote through an online portal.
“Everyone would start reposting on their Instagram stories, and they would all start campaigning for me on their own, and I didn’t even know that it was happening until after the fact, when I would talk to some friends who told me, ‘Oh, I voted for you!’” Ramirez said.
Elevating student voices on LAUSD’s school board
A critical forum for Ramirez to amplify student voices is through LAUSD’s school board meetings, where she speaks on behalf of students and co-sponsors resolutions, including one honoring Latino heritage.
Each month — and after a week of reviewing roughly 600 pages worth of materials and a summary in preparation for the board meeting — Ramirez is pulled out of school around 11:00 a.m., after her second period class, and is driven to downtown Los Angeles for the board meeting.
“Once I get there, I have lunch. I prepare, I look over all the board resolutions we might be discussing in the boardroom, and I take notes. I circle any things that might be relevant to students and that I might want to comment on,” Ramirez said. “And I also look for any board resolutions that I might want to co-sponsor.”
LAUSD’s student board members’ votes don’t technically count in board decisions, but they can introduce resolutions and can cast advisory votes, which school board member Tanya Ortiz Franklin said is “powerful” when making major decisions for the district.
Ramirez said it is vital that students’ voices are heard by school board members and the community at large, noting that district leadership often has to prioritize other challenges and communities.
“Sometimes the responsibilities that we (students) hold are big, but it’s not as big as what board members are doing. They have so much more on their plate,” Ramirez said, stressing the importance of providing students one-on-one attention.
“We are accessible, and (students) can reach out with any worries or comments, or just things that they want to see in the district. … I will always be attentive to the needs. … That’s the biggest thing.”
Ramirez also emphasized the importance of individual, one-on-one interactions, where she meets with students and encourages them to attend board meetings and join the various student councils at the district level, including an Asian American Pacific Islander council, individual board members’ councils and the Superintendent’s Student Advisory Council.
“Oftentimes, we feel a gap or lack of connectivity with our school board members, especially because our school board members are always on their platform … and so as students, a lot of times, we feel like we can’t really reach out to them,” Ramirez said. “My biggest thing is to really bridge that gap that we might feel.”
Bridging gaps
Beyond attending regular school board meetings, Ramirez has attended leadership conferences, appeared on television for Latino heritage month, reached out for collaboration with the Mexican Consulate and is working to launch a podcast later this year.
The podcast, she said, is in Spanish and will specifically cover topics pertinent to English learners. “That’s a community that’s really close to my heart and I always want to support,” she added.
Ramirez’s commitment to her heritage makes her stand out, Ortiz Franklin said.
“What’s so clear from Karen is how proud she is to be Latina, how privileged she feels to be a representative on the board in a district that is almost three-quarters Latino, and just what that means for immigrant families in particular, given how much of Los Angeles has been influenced by immigrant communities over the past generations,” Ortiz Franklin added.
Moving forward with confidence
Ramirez’s motivation to enter public service goes back to her parents, who encouraged her to take advantage of every opportunity.
“Some of the things that we … don’t have access to are things that you do have access to,” she remembers her parents telling her. “So if you have that opportunity, then you definitely have to take it.”
Ramirez said, “When I was told about the student board member position, and I knew that I had the opportunity to do something for my community as a whole, I thought that that was something that I couldn’t give up.”
Ramirez said her education at the Girls Academic Leadership Academy — LAUSD’s only all-girls school — has been especially formative in developing her confidence, not only as a board member, but as a leader in her high school’s student body and various clubs.
“Being in that environment around so many women, I felt like my confidence grew. In school, we always like to support each other,” Ramirez said. “I bring that confidence and that energy anywhere I go.”
Ramirez has accepted a scholarship to Yale University, and this fall she will become the first in her family to attend college.
“It’s an honor. I’m so excited to see how I experience that,” Ramirez said. “And anything that I learn there, I’ll bring that to my family and bring back to my community.”
Editors’ note: This story has been updated based on information made available after publication.
Faced with an ongoing teacher shortage, many California arts education advocates have been championing the use of career technical education (CTE) to attract new arts teachers to help fulfill the state’s historic arts mandate. The sticking point has been that the credential has only been applied to secondary classrooms, leaving elementary students out.
That may change if Gov. Gavin Newsom’s initial 2024-25 state budget becomes law. This proposal, subject to change in May, when the numbers are revised in response to shifting economic conditions and policy issues, calls for the Commission on Teacher Credentialing to create a new Elementary Arts and Music Education pathway for career technical education teachers. This expansion would allow more working artists to share their expertise with California students, a move many arts advocates praise.
“Newsom is paving the way for a more vibrant and well-rounded educational experience, fostering creativity and skill development at every stage,” said Allison Gamlen, visual and performing arts coordinator for the San Mateo County Office of Education. “Empowering CTE teachers with the ability to bring their expertise to elementary classrooms is a positive step that will enrich the artistic learning experience for young students.”
Expanding this credential into elementary schools might help recruit working artists, from musicians to animators, who are passionate about their craft into the school system, which is struggling to find staff in the wake of the pandemic.
“It’s really exciting,” said Austin Beutner, the former superintendent of Los Angeles Unified School District, who authored Proposition 28. He said the governor’s direction to the Commission on Teacher Credentialing about expanding the career technical education pathways for arts educators to include elementary schools “will help all 6 million children in public schools across California benefit from the additional funding Prop. 28 provides for arts education.”
While many arts advocates are excited, some also caution patience, given the exhaustive nature of the bureaucratic process. The budget may well undergo significant changes during the May revision, for example.
“Teaching artists will now have another pathway into employment at schools to meet the needs of Prop. 28,” said Eric Engdahl, professor emeritus at CSU East Bay and past president of the California Council on Teacher Education. But “knowing how state bureaucracies work and the laws that govern their actions, I don’t think this will produce any new teachers for at least two years, quite possibly more.”
One key concern has been whether artists have sufficient knowledge of best practices for younger children. Some are concerned that teaching third graders requires a different skill set than eighth graders, for instance.
“Elementary has different foundational considerations, including meeting young students’ developmental and reading needs,” said Letty Kraus, director of the California county superintendents’ statewide arts initiative. “The developmental piece is an important one.”
Kraus believes the state should solve the staffing problem by widening the existing arts educator pipeline.
“Rather than push CTE down into elementary, I think it is important to look at our existing credentialing system and consider how to increase statewide access to credentialing pathways, including virtual,” she said, “and also how to remove financial barriers and support credential candidates while they complete their student teaching.”
Some arts education experts warn that teaching a subject is not the same as practicing it.
“I am concerned about having CTE teachers teaching a core subject like arts, math and science —mastering a subject doesn’t mean you can teach it,” said Abe Flores, deputy director of policy and programs at Create CA, an advocacy group. “I know how to read, but it doesn’t mean I can adequately teach a student to read.”
Others say that the new credential should require adequate training in child development as well as pedagogical concerns.
“Since it is now in the CTC’s court, they will have to create a pathway that ensures preparedness,” said Engdahl. “A CTE credential requires classes in addition to industry experience, and the CTC should be looking at those classes closely.”
Engdahl has confidence that aspiring arts educators will apply due diligence to their professional development.
“As for teacher preparedness, I am not really too concerned. When I was a teaching artist, and having worked with teaching artists for many years, I have noticed that their classroom preparedness is generally excellent.”
However, classrooms today are not what they were before the pandemic, and many children are coping with mental health issues as well as learning loss. That raises the stakes for all new teachers, Engdahl notes, not just arts educators.
“If there is an area of concern, it is in the changes in schools after Covid,” said Engdahl. “Students and schools are different now, and it is more challenging helping students to heal and learn.”
This urgency to adapt to shifting school needs is one reason Beutner believes change is called for.
“You have to meet the students where they are,” said Beutner. “You also have to meet the aspiring teachers where they are.”
