The Qataris that own the jet offered to Trump have beeen trying to sell the it since 2020. No takers. It’s very expensive to operate–nearly $30,000 an hour–and it’s so big that it can land only in very large airports.
Qatar would be thrilled to give it to Trump and unload it.
If Trump gets it, it will have to be stripped down to be sure it has no listening devices. The cost of refurbishment: $1 billion.
If Trump gets it, he will use it after he leaves the Presidency and bill the taxpayers for the cost of operating it. After all, it is a gift to the nation. And that’s the way he rolls.
Daylarlyn Gonzalez organizes a class project among freshmen at Arvin High taking a dual enrollment course through Bakersfield College.
Credit: Emma Gallegos/EdSource
A new report delivers bad and good news for the Central Valley.
The bad news: The vast majority of parents, 79%, want their children to get a bachelor’s degree, but just 26% of students in the region are on pace to achieve that.
The good news: Central Valley educators in both K-12 and higher education are pioneering strategies that could transform the region’s low college attainment rates. That includes broadly expanding dual enrollment opportunities; increasingthe number of students meeting requirements to graduate from high school; and creating regional partnerships to smooth key transitions between high school, community college and four-year universities.
A sweeping new report, “Pathways to College Completion in the San Joaquin Valley,” by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) found a multitude of factors contributing to lower college attainment rate in the region, compared to the rest of the state, including a lack of preparation in high school, low university application rates (especially to the UC system), financial constraints, campus proximity, and a perception of less access. That’s a problem for the state, as well as the region.
“When we look to the state’s future, the San Joaquin Valley is especially important,” said Hans Johnson, one of the report’s authors.
That’s because the Central Valley is populous, young and growing rapidly — 4 million and counting — compared with other parts of the state. But it is also a region that requires attention, because, over the last 50 years, it has fallen behind the rest of the state economically. In 1974, residents in the Central Valley made 90% of the state’s per capita income. In 2020, that number had fallen to 68%.
“When you increase the educational attainment rate here in the Central Valley, it lifts the entire region socioeconomically and culturally as well,” said Benjamin Duran, executive director of the Central Valley Higher Education Consortium.
He said that too few students obtaining any kind of degree — associate, bachelor’s or advanced — means the valley will continue to have too few people in critical professions, such as nursing, medicine and teaching.
“It’s way below what our economy in general demands,” said Johnson, a senior fellow with PPIC. “We know the value of a college degree statewide is incredibly strong — and in the Valley as well. So, not everybody has to go (to college), but more people and more students should be going than are going right now.”
The report finds that students in the Central Valley tend to graduate from high school at nearly the same rate as other students in the state, but show a sharp decline during the critical juncture of transitioning from high school to college and, for students who register at community colleges, which a majority of Valley college students do, transferring to a four-year university or college.
High school students lack preparation
According to the PPIC report, students in the Valley have wildly different experiences based simply on which school districts they attend.
“That’s both encouraging and kind of discouraging that we have such a wide variation that where you go to school, to not a small extent, is going to determine what kind of possibilities you have for going on to college,” Johnson said.
School districts that do a good job preparing socioeconomically disadvantaged students tend to also prepare their wealthier peers well, the report shows.
Two of the Valley’s largest districts, for example, demonstrate this. The college-going rate for Fresno Unified’s socioeconomically disadvantaged students is 64%, compared with 67% of their more advantaged peers. Those same rates for the Kern High School District are 48% and 53% respectively.
The problem is that many Central Valley students are not graduating from high school with the preparation that they need to succeed in college, according to Olga Rodriguez, one of the report’s authors.
One important metric is how many students have taken the full college preparatory sequence — known as A-G — required for admission to California’s public universities. In the Central Valley, 4 out of 10 high school graduates met the A-G requirements, compared with 6 out of 10 for Los Angeles and Bay Area students.
“If you want to increase the number of college graduates, that’s where we have so much potential,” said Rodriguez, director of the PPIC Higher Education Center.
Students who do not meet A-G requirements are not able to begin their college career at a CSU or UC school. Additionally, this lack of preparation makes it more challenging for students at community colleges to successfully transfer to a four-year university, Rodriguez said.
To improve their rates, some school districts have shifted to mandating that students graduate with A-G requirements; others have simply dropped classes that are not A-G eligible. However, many other districts are not prioritizing A-G classes.
“A-G policies often seemed centered on politics and local industry needs — as opposed to being focused on students’ needs and aspirations,” the report states.
An analysis by EdSource found that 56% of high school seniors do not complete the A-G requirements. EdSource found that the problem is particularly dire among Black and Latino students, as well as in certain regions, such as Northern California and the Central Valley.
For many communities in the Central Valley, higher education is considered more “aspirational” than realistic, Duran said, adding that it’s the job of all educators across the spectrum to educate both students and parents about how to make college a reality.
The default choice for many Central Valley students is to stay at home and attend a local community college, rather than attend a CSU or UC — even for students who have the grades. The perception is that it ends up being cheaper and maybe a safer option, but that’s not always the case.
“When you look at the net price, it’s actually more affordable to go to a CSU than it is to stay at a community college,” said Rodriguez. “Especially when you think about the likelihood of completion and how long it’s going to take you.”
Partnerships make the difference
Because the transitions between institutions is where students tend to fail, the report says that partnerships between high schools, community colleges, CSU campuses and the region’s only UC campus, in Merced, are important for Central Valley students.
In this area, the region is “ahead of the game,” said Rodriguez.
The Associate Degree for Transfer (ADT) is a program that guarantees community college students who meet certain requirements a spot at a CSU campus, but the UC system has not joined in. However, UC Merced — the only UC in the Central Valley — is unique in having its own version of an ADT guarantee for regional community colleges, Johnson notes. The university also has a similar guarantee program aimed at high school students in regional districts.
There are similar partnerships throughout the Valley that are trying to ease those transitions. For instance, Fresno State has a new Bulldog Bound Program that guarantees admission to high school students in over 40 school districts who meet requirements — and also gives them support during their high school career.
The region has three K-16 collaboratives that focus on making sure that schools are able to prepare students for college at a young age — whether that is through educating parents or helping high school teachers, particularly in English and math, get master’s degrees so they can teach dual enrollment courses.
Dual enrollment has thrived in the Central Valley, thanks to partnerships largely between community colleges and K-12 schools in the region. Dual enrollment allows students to take college credit courses during high school, which makes them more likely to continue on to college after high school.
The work being done in the Central Valley serves as an incubator for what can happen in the rest of the state, said Duran.
“The work we do is collaborative,” said Duran. “We try to bring projects and initiatives that can not only be replicated here, but in the rest of the state.”
If these changes lead to a swell of enrollment, the report notes that there is plenty of higher education infrastructure in the region. Few colleges or universities have programs that are impacted — unlike in other parts of the state. Both CSU and UC are banking on growth in this region.
Participants at the Think Forward: Learning with AI forum in April were asked to share their hopes and fears for the future of AI in an opening exercise.
CREDIT: Photo by Ray Mares Photography
In recent months, the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) faced a significant setback when the tech provider it contracted to build personalized report cards for students went out of business. This was both a major financial loss for the district and a significant loss for students. The chatbot dust-up underscores a critical issue in our education system: the need for robust, forward-thinking policies and practices to navigate the integration of technology in our schools. Our school systems must be able to not only withstand disruptions but thrive on them.
As post-pandemic learning gaps widen, school districts everywhere are at an inflection point when it comes to the use of artificial intelligence (AI). AI offers unprecedented opportunities to tackle complex challenges like widening achievement gaps, teacher shortages, and mental health crises among students — but AI systems must also promote equity and access, particularly for historically marginalized communities. There must be policy guardrails to protect student privacy. And there must be high quality training to empower educators. Achieving this vision requires bold leadership and a clear understanding of each stakeholder’s role.
While AI can be a powerful tool to address long-standing inequities and improve educational outcomes, it requires strategic and collaborative efforts. The call to action is clear: Educators, policymakers, education technology innovators and community leaders must join forces to create resilient, adaptable education systems.
With a thriving tech sector, including a broad base of AI startups, California is uniquely positioned to lead the country in the use of AI in education. The state Department of Education has already offered early guidance to schools. The Los Angeles County Office of Education’s cross-sector task force developed guidelines to support responsible AI implementation across 80 school districts. Los Angeles’ Da Vinci Academy piloted the use of AI in project-based learning. Lynwood Unified has been a leader in thinking about how AI can be used responsibly to transform district operations and learning systems. These are steps in the right direction, but more is needed.
Think big about how AI can transform education. Leaders in the space must have a clear vision for the future of education before technology can help realize that vision. The state should consider fostering partnerships between educators, policymakers, Silicon Valley ed-tech developers, and community leaders to rethink and redesign schools and education systems for a world where generative artificial intelligence is ubiquitous.
Help districts use AI strategically. Districts face an overwhelming number of AI-enabled tools and “solutions,” and risk spreading limited resources on a random assortment of disconnected products. California’s educational county offices can play a role in helping districts identify priorities and streamline funds to proven AI-enabled tools and strategies designed to solve specific problems.
Allocate funds to support and test AI initiatives, particularly in low-income and historically marginalized communities. CRPE’s research with the Rand Corp. shows that school districts with more advantaged populations are ahead in training their teachers on AI. Funding and evidence-building initiatives are needed to close, rather than widen, existing learning gaps.
Provide detailed, actionable implementation strategies to help districts navigate AI adoption effectively. Our report suggests California and other states should be “dogged about implementation,” ensuring schools get technical assistance and research partnerships to support them as they try various approaches.
Make sure there are effective state policy guardrails. It’s essential for California to provide ongoing policy guidance and rules so that every district need not go it alone. Legislation under consideration in Sacramento calls for policies to be in place by January 2026. While we are glad to see policy attention, protections for kids cannot wait that long. A better approach would be to begin piloting policies immediately and revising them as needed.
California, a leader in technological innovation, must ensure that its education systems are future-ready. By embracing these strategies, California can lead the nation in transforming education through AI. The LAUSD incident serves as a stark reminder of what happens when systems are unprepared for technological integration. Let’s use this moment as a catalyst for change, ensuring that our schools are equipped to harness the positive potential of AI for the benefit of all students.
Oliver Darcy writes a blog about the media called Status that is ahead of the news. This story is a doozy.Business Insider wrote an article that was critical of Don Jr., and MAGA world went berserk. Typically, people in politics understand that being criticized comes with the job. Harry S Truman famously said, “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.”
The Trumps, however, do not accept any criticism. Anyone who dares to question their actions becomes a target, not only for anger, but for threats of legal action by the U.S. government. The tactic is clear: censorship by intimidation. This is Fascism 1.0. No one dare criticize the leader or his family.
Darcy writes:
An unflattering story about Donald Trump Jr. triggered a White House assault on Business Insider and parent company Axel Springer—and signaled just how far Trumpworld is willing to go to silence critical coverage.
When Business Insider published a story this week headlined “Don Jr. Is the New Hunter Biden,” it was, on its face, a fairly standard piece of political reporting. Written by Bethany McLean, a well-regarded veteran of Vanity Fair, Reuters, and Fortune, the article carried a simple premise: Just as Republicans had long accused Hunter Biden of profiting off his father’s position, Trump’s eldest son now appeared to be dabbling in ethically dubious behavior in search of profit. It was the kind of story that Donald Trump Jr. was certain not to like, but not one that seemed destined to generate much fallout.
Instead, the story has resulted in a coordinated campaign by the White House and its allies not just to discredit the reporting, but to threaten the company behind it. Breitbart, the weaponized MAGA outlet, published a lengthy broadside on Tuesday attacking the piece and accusing McLean of journalistic malpractice. The piece, written by Matthew Boyle, who frequently acts as the unofficial press arm for Trumpworld, was quite a bit in itself. But buried in the bluster and long-winded statements from Trump allies that Boyle quoted was something more serious.
A White House official used the opportunity to deliver an extraordinary statement accusing Axel Springer, the Mathias Döpfner-led German media conglomerate that owns Business Insider, of engaging in a foreign influence operation. The unnamed official suggested the company’s journalism might not just be biased (which it wasn’t), but illegal (which it also wasn’t). It was a not-so-subtle warning to the company to fall in line or it might seek to pull government levers that would be damaging to its business.
“Donald Trump Jr. is an innovator and visionary who is successfully reimagining the conservative media ecosystem—and the left is truly petrified,” the White House told Breitbart. “Axel Springer, a foreign-based media organization, is brazenly weaponizing its platforms to sow political division and spread disinformation in a manner that may well stretch beyond journalism, into illegal foreign political meddling.”
It sounded like a line you’d expect from a right-wing troll online. But such trolls now occupy actual seats of power. And their incendiary rhetoric is being delivered not from the fringes, but from inside the White House. It’s not just Trump Jr. lashing out, though he has also been amplifying every attack he can find as he rages on social media and—in a twist of irony—appearing deeply triggered, to borrow one of his favorite terms for mocking the left. That fury has been further echoed by Republican lawmakers. Sen. Jim Banks of Indiana and Sen. Tim Sheehy of Montana have both railed against the story, rushing to the defense of Trump Jr. In any event, the threat from the White House, which did not respond to a request for comment from Status,upped the ante.
Inside Business Insider, however, the episode has naturally consumed the attention of its leadership. I’m told there was a brief internal discussion about whether the framing of the piece needed to be revised after publication, though ultimately, the story remained untouched. Still, the unease inside the organization is real, given the volume of blowback, where it is coming from, and the fact that it is aimed squarely at the publication’s parent company.
Indeed, executives at both Business Insider and Axel Springer are haunted by the memory of the Bill Ackman debacle last year, which drew intense right-wing blowback. Then, earlier this year, Elon Musk falsely accused POLITICO—another Axel Springer property—of accepting money from USAID, painting it as a government-funded propaganda outlet. The claim was nonsense, but it worked. It clouded the public narrative with conspiratorial nonsense and created precisely the kind of reputational headache Axel Springer executives have tried to dodge. It also led to every federal agency canceling their subscriptions to the outlet’s “pro” tier.
Behind the scenes, Axel Springer has worked hard to avoid becoming a partisan punching bag. At Business Insider specifically, the company last year brought in seasoned editor Jamie Heller from The Wall Street Journal to raise editorial standards and minimize reputational risks. But none of that matters when the people in power aren’t playing by the rules. Axel Springer might not want another high-profile feud dragging the company into controversy. But now they have one—this time again involving the federal government.
In a statement, an Axel Springer spokesperson told Status, “Axel Springer is a global media company committed to press freedom. Our U.S. newsrooms operate independently without editorial interference, and we stand firmly behind their right to report freely and without intimidation.” A Business Insider spokesperson separately told Status, “Our newsroom operates with full editorial independence, and we stand by our reporting.”
The larger concern is the chilling effect these kinds of attacks can have—not just on one story, but on the broader environment in which journalists operate. Notably, the White House did not dispute any of the facts reported by Business Insider. Instead, it equated unflattering reporting with foreign subversion and deployed the weight of the executive branch in an effort to silence it. The message wasn’t just aimed at Business Insider. It was aimed at every newsroom under the Axel Springer umbrella—and, more broadly, at any journalist thinking about covering the Trump family with rigor.
For Trump, the playbook is clear: Any outlet that scrutinizes him or his family becomes an enemy. And while that has long been his modus operandi, the stakes are higher now that he’s more willing than ever to blur the lines between his personal grievances and the instruments of state.
In California and across the United States this year, policies banning or restricting student cellphone use on school campuses are being enacted in an effort to curb bullying, classroom distractions and addiction to the devices.
“It’s part of the zeitgeist right now, and there is a trend toward cellphone restriction,” said Troy Flint, spokesperson for the California School Boards Association. “There’s more scrutiny of the issue now than there was previously.”
Lincoln Unified School District in Stockton, Santa Barbara Unified, San Francisco Unified, Roseville City School District and Folsom Cordova Unified near Sacramento are among the California districts starting the school year with cellphone restrictions on their campuses.
Cellphone restrictions look different across the state, depending on school district, school or even individual teachers’ policies. In some schools, students entering a campus or classroom are required to put their phones in an electronic pouch that can only be unlocked by school staff with a special magnet. In other schools, cellphones are turned off and put in lockers in the classroom. More commonly, students are asked to turn off their phones and to put them in their backpacks or pockets during class time.
California district leaders got a nudge from Gov. Gavin Newsom last week when he urged them to take immediate steps to restrict cellphone use this academic year. Newsom reminded school leaders that legislation signed in 2019 gives them the authority to regulate smartphones during school hours.
“Excessive smartphone use among young people is linked to increased anxiety, depression, and other mental health issues,” Newsom said in a letter to school leaders on Aug. 14.
California lawmakers are also considering proposed legislation to restrict student cellphone use on all public school campuses, a mandate at least five other states have already enacted. Without a statewide mandate, it’s up to districts, schools or teachers to implement a policy.
San Diego Unified officials have indicated they are studying the issue, while Los Angeles Unified (LAUSD), the state’s largest school district, is finalizing a policy that will ban student cellphone and social media use. It will go into effect in January.
“Kids no longer have the opportunity to just be kids,” said Nick Melvoin, the LAUSD school board member who authored a resolution calling for the policy. “I’m hoping this resolution will help students not only focus in class, but also give them a chance to interact and engage more with each other — and just be kids.”
Melvoin commended Newsom for encouraging other districts to follow suit.
“I have seen the positive effects firsthand at schools that have already implemented a phone-free school policy, and look forward to seeing the benefits of this policy take hold districtwide next semester,” Melvoin said.
But the policies have had pushback from some parents who fear losing touch with their children during emergencies.
“Some parents, some families feel that the cellphone is essential for notification in the case of a natural disaster, a school emergency, or a school shooting,” said the CSBA’s Flint. “Or some people use it for less extreme, but still important reasons, like monitoring their kids’ required medicine. Some families with students with disabilities like to have an additional level of contact with their students at schools.”
Cellphone addiction is a problem
School cellphone bans gained momentum nationally in May when Surgeon General Vivek Murthy issued an advisory calling on policymakers, technology companies, researchers and families to minimize the harm of social media and to create safer, healthier online environments to protect children online.
Murthy said there is growing evidence that social media use is associated with harm to a young person’s mental health, adding that 95% of children between the ages of 13 and 17 use at least one social media platform, and more than a third use social media constantly.
Santa Barbara Unified has made mental health a priority when it comes to cellphone use on campus. The Off and Away policy requires cellphones be turned off and put away in classrooms, and anywhere on a campus where learning is taking place, said Assistant Superintendent ShaKenya Edison.
Consequences for not complying with the policy ranges from students and parents being required to meet with school staff, to confiscating phones. Students may be referred to counseling or a therapist if necessary, Edison said.
“One of the things that the (planning) committee was very clear about — we had doctors also on our committee, and psychologists — is that we need to treat cellphone usage as an addiction, not as defiance,” Edison said. “So it really is trying to get at the root of the dependency of the phone.”
Students became more reliant on cellphones and smartwatches during the Covid pandemic, when the devices were the only way they could connect to their social circle, Edison said. Students sometimes use their phone to deal with the anxiety of being in the classroom, or when they are struggling with academics, she said.
University of San Francisco researchers found that 12- to 13-year-old children in the U.S. doubled their non-school related screen time from 3.8 hours a day to 7.7 hours a day when campuses were closed during the pandemic.
Warning signs of smartphone addiction in students include becoming distressed at the thought of being without their phone, thinking about their phone when not using it, interrupting whatever they are doing when contacted on their phone, or having arguments with others because of phone use, said Jason Nagata, associate professor of pediatrics at the University of California San Francisco.
Santa Barbara Unified is taking on the cellphone addiction problem inside and outside the classroom. Along with including parents in the planning of the program, the district offers parents information about monitoring social media and age-appropriate apps on their website.
“We receive gratitude from parents saying, ‘Thank you for tackling this. I’m trying to tackle it at home, and I don’t know how to tackle the dependency. So thank you for at least dealing with it on the school site,’ ” Edison said.
Students are more focused without phones
Andrea Blair-Simon says the ban on cellphone use in the Folsom Cordova Unified School District allows her eighth-grade daughter, Laila, to fully focus on her studies in the classroom and to socialize with others during breaks and lunch. She had previously watched her daughter sit with her friends texting one another instead of talking.
“I love the cellphone policy,” Blair-Simon said. “I think it benefits the kids. I think it benefits the teachers. I’m not saying don’t have it (a cellphone), I’m just saying it’s not necessary during school hours. Before or after, do whatever you want. It’s your life. It’s your own time. But when you’re on a teacher’s time — school time — using school resources, listen to your teacher.”
The no-phone policies also curtail online bullying, Blair-Simon said. Things like posting unflattering pictures with mean comments can damage kids’ self-image, she said.
Under last year’s cellphone policy update, Folsom Cordova Unified no longer permits students in transitional kindergarten through eighth grade to use cellphones, smartwatches or other mobile communication devices anywhere on campus during the school day. High school students can’t use them in classrooms.
Last year, Laila and her classmates were required to use a lockable Yondr Pouch, which allows students to keep their phone, but with no access to it unless a teacher or school administrator unlocks the pouch. Now, instead of pouches, students have been asked to turn off their phones and put them away.
“This year, there are no warnings, and you are to be sent straight to the office,” Laila said. “This year, they have a little locker in the office, like a phone locker, and it has to be locked in there until the end of the day if they catch you with it.”
Laila would like to have her phone at lunch or during passing periods, but she acknowledges that students are more focused and spend more time talking to one another during breaks than before the ban.
Policies improve school climate
Drama teacher Keith Carames says there has been a positive shift in culture and climate at James Lick Middle School in San Francisco since the school began requiring students to lock their phones in a Yondr Pouch at the beginning of the school day.
“There’s been a significant shift away from the buzzing and the distractions,” Carames said. “There’s been a significant decrease in digital bullying.”
The school is part of San Francisco Unified, which requires cellphones, smartwatches and other mobile devices to be turned off and put away during classes and passing periods.
James Lick Middle School has its own, stricter policy that requires students to present a lockable pouch, provided by the school, when they show up on the campus — empty or not. If the student does not have their pouch, the phone is confiscated. If a student’s phone is not in the pouch during the school day, security is called to confiscate it, Carames said.
Some districts in the state without districtwide cellphone bans allow individual schools to make their own rules about cellphone use on their campus.
Fresno Unified relies on a 20-year-old policy that prohibits students from using phones in an inappropriate and disruptive way, like invading someone’s privacy, cheating on tests or ridiculing or shaming someone. Students who violate the policy can have their phones confiscated, or can be suspended or expelled.
The board policy is the “minimum requirement” for the district, Fresno Unified spokesperson A.J. Kato told EdSource on Wednesday. Each school determines how the policy is implemented on its campus and has the discretion to go beyond what the policy dictates.
Bullard High in Fresno Unified introduced the Yondr Pouch in 2022 to create a phone-free campus, The Fresno Bee reported. Students must lock their phones in the pouch during the school day – even during lunch. After 2022-23, the first school year with the pouches, Bullard High officials credited its 17% improvement in English proficiency to the restriction, The Bee reported.
Teachers largely support restrictions
Teachers nationwide say cellphones are a major distraction for students in class, according to Pew Research released in 2023. A third of public K-12 teachers surveyed for the report said cellphones are a major problem, while 20% said they are a minor problem. Almost three-quarters of the high school teachers surveyed said phones are a major distraction to their students, compared with 33% of middle school teachers and 6% of elementary school teachers.
Cellphone disruptions in the classroom have been a recurring topic for teachers and administrators at staff meetings in the Roseville City School District, said school board member Jonathan Zachreson.
Some teachers in the district conducted an informal experiment, asking students to note how many times they received alerts on their phones during class. The teachers discovered that the students who had the most alerts were performing worse than others academically, Zachreson said.
The K-8 district near Sacramento put a new cellphone policy in place this year to cut down on classroom distractions and behavior problems. The policy requires students to turn off cellphones, personal tablets, Bluetooth headphones or smartwatches and to store them away during school hours.
The district’s elementary schools already had a no-phone policy, but it was not enforced uniformly across the district, Zachreson said. The district decided to put a uniform policy in place and to expand it to all grade levels.
Even without district policies, some teachers have banned phones in their classrooms. Nicolle Fefferman, a longtime LAUSD educator and co-founder of the Facebook group Parents Supporting Teachers, is one of them. When cellphones are not tucked away, Fefferman said, it can be challenging for teachers to “police” their use.
“I would tell my students: ‘I see you for so little time every day that I’m really selfish. I’m really greedy,’” Fefferman said. “‘I want every minute of your attention for the work that we’re doing together in this class.’”
A Phineas Banning Senior High School classroom with a “phone parking lot” in Los Angeles Unified School District.Credit: Mallika Seshadri
United Teachers Los Angeles, the union representing more than 35,000 educators across LAUSD, supports the board’s decision to implement a districtwide policy.
“For these policies to be effective, strong collaboration is essential,” Gina Gray, an LAUSD middle school English teacher, told EdSource in a statement on behalf of the union.
“School district administrators must work closely with educators and parents to implement these changes,” Gray said. “Educators care deeply about the well-being of our students, and their families should be included in decisions about changes to our school communities.”
California Teachers Association President David Goldberg agrees: “Our union has supported improving school environments and restricting the use of smartphones on campuses,” he said in a statement. “As educators, we always seek to help our students reach their full potential, and we are moved by the data, listening to our students and their families, and our own experiences showing that smartphones can be a distraction and harmful to the mental health of students.”
Bans gain national momentum
California may soon join Florida, Indiana, Louisiana, South Carolina and Ohio in passing legislation that bans or restricts cellphone use on public school campuses.
Although California law allows districts to restrict the use of cellphones on campus, it does not require them to. That could change if a bill working its way through the Legislature passes. Assembly Bill 3216 would requireschool districts to adopt a policy to limit or prohibit the use of smartphones by students. The bill passed the Senate Appropriations Committee last week and is likely to make it to the governor’s desk for final approval, according to School Services, an education consulting company.
Another piece of legislation, Senate Bill 1283, would allow, but not require, districts to limit students’ use of social media while on campus. The bill is expected to get a vote on the Assembly floor this month.
The bills have bipartisan support.
“Josh Hoover’s a Republican who’s putting forth this legislation (Assembly Bill 3216),” Zachreson said. “Gavin Newsom is pushing school districts to take action. You have Ron DeSantis and an Arkansas governor doing the same thing. I mean, when you have Gavin Newsom and Ron DeSantis on the same page, I think you have a winning issue.”
West Contra Costa Unified’s Stege Elementary School in Richmond.
Photo: Andrew Reed/EdSource
A recently filed lawsuit against the West Contra Costa Unified School District could set a new precedent for how districts in California handle and comply with complaints filed by students, educators and community members.
The lawsuit, filed by civil rights law firm Public Advocates last month, alleges the school district failed to remedy issues in the required time frame for nearly 50 “Williams complaints” filed by teachers, students and parents since June 2023. The bulk of the complaints were about poor building conditions at Stege Elementary School, and three were filed about teacher vacancies. There are five complainants, including four educators and a parent, who are suing the district.
West Contra Costa is the first district in the state to be sued under the Williams v. California settlement in 2004, a landmark case that established the Williams complaint process, and the right to textbooks, safe schools and qualified teachers for all California public school students. Public Advocates attorneys led that charge 20 years ago and are now turning to the courts to uphold the standards it set and to stop the unlawful practice of filling full-time teacher positions with rolling substitutes.
“It’s important for districts to know that this is a process that can be enforced by the courts, and they can be subject to a court order when they don’t abide by this specific process,” said Dane Shikman, attorney with Munger, Tolles, & Olson LLP, who is assisting with the lawsuit.
Public Advocates attorney Karissa Provenza said she hopes the lawsuit sets a precedent and that other districts that aren’t complying with the Williams complaint process “fall in line.”
The law firm has kept a close watch on West Contra Costa for years, and Provenza has spent the last few years building relationships with educators, organizers and families. But it shouldn’t just be those districts that Public Advocates attorneys are watching that are held accountable.
“We know there are issues across the board when it comes to districts following through with Williams complaints,” Provenza said. “We’re hoping this (lawsuit) can stand out.”
Anyone can file a Williams complaint, and school districts have up to 30 days to fix the issue and 45 days to respond to the complaint in court. District officials responded to the 45 building condition complaints at Stege Elementary School six months later, and only after plaintiffs’ attorneys repeatedly reminded the district of its legal obligation, the lawsuit alleges.
“It’s a highly informal process that the districts often get away with something less than a full remedy of the complaints, or they delay on getting a response back,” Shikman said.
According to the lawsuit, West Contra Costa’s response “acknowledged the complaints, cited a nonexistent section of the Education Code, claimed the district had no duty to respond within the statutory 45-day timeline, and promised to provide a substantive response with an update by January 12, 2024.”
That response never came, the lawsuit says.
The complaints said the Richmond school had moldy walls, inoperable windows, classrooms reaching more than 90 degrees without ventilation, and broken floor tiles. Lead and asbestos were also found after the district hired an environmental firm to test building materials.
“One of the worst conditions for the students’ learning and teaching was probably the heat,” said Stege teacher Sam Cleare, who is one of the complainants in the lawsuit. “My first year there, we even watched crayons melt outside, but it wasn’t even that much hotter outside than it was inside.”
A student in the after-school program at Stege Elementary School in the West Contra Costa Unified School District.Credit: Sam Cleare
Building conditions at Stege Elementary were never improved, and district officials have “repeatedly” acknowledged conditions at Stege were “dangerous,” the lawsuit says. Superintendent Chris Hurst announced the school was closing for repairs on July 23, four days after the lawsuit was filed and hazardous materials were detected during the removal of window panels.
District officials did not respond to requests for comment on this story and have previously said they don’t comment on litigation.
Unlawful practices
District officials did respond to the three complaints about teacher vacancies, the lawsuit says, but the positions weren’t filled within 30 days and solutions weren’t reported.
Hurst addressed teacher vacancies at a recent board meeting and said the district is “working hard” to fill all positions before the start of the school year this week. The district has posted on job boards and social media platforms, attended job fairs and is partnering with residency programs to recruit teachers.
“But the district’s statutory mandate is not just to ‘try hard’ to recruit teachers; it is to actually provide every student with a permanent, qualified teacher,” the lawsuit says.
If positions aren’t filled, the district’s plan is to fall back on substitutes, which is the reason teacher vacancy complaints were filed in the first place. The complaints said it was illegal to rely on substitutes long-term and in the district’s response, officials acknowledged its practices were unlawful.
Provenza said she is not surprised the district continues to rely on substitutes.
“I wish I could start hearing that they were going to start shifting their ways, but unfortunately, it seems like relying unlawfully on substitutes is something that they’re going to continue to do,” Provenza said.
The district has relied on day-to-day, 30-day, and 60-day substitutes to fill teacher vacancies. Teachers have also had to pick up extra classes or have had students added to their classrooms, often from different grades. This school year, the district is also asking credentialed staff who aren’t usually in the classroom to step in.
“Substitutes did not follow curricula or assign homework as a dedicated year-long educator would have, and students in those classrooms were denied the stability and consistency that a permanent qualified teacher provides,” the lawsuit says.
Complaints were filed at Stege Elementary, Helms Middle and Kennedy High schools, some of the district’s highest-need schools, where more than 80% of students are low-income. Substitutes were used for an entire school year in some classes, the lawsuit says.
Some students at Kennedy High weren’t sure they would receive grades at the end of the last school year because they never had a permanent teacher, according to the lawsuit. Permanent teachers weren’t assigned to an English language development class, a reading and writing class, a P.E. class, and two music classes.
Most of Kennedy’s students are Hispanic or Latino and Black or African American — 73% and 18% respectively in the 2022-23 school year, the most recent year of available state data. That same school year, 84% of students did not meet grade-level math standards and nearly 58% did not meet reading standards.
A math, science and English class at Helms Middle did not have permanent teachers the last school year, the lawsuit alleges. Nearly 70% of Helms students did not meet grade-level literacy standards and 82% did not meet math standards for the 2022-23 school year, data shows.
Helms Middle mostly serves Hispanic and Latino students, almost 83% in the 2022-23 school year. The next largest population is Black or African American, about 7%. Almost half the students (47%) are also English learners.
There weren’t permanent teachers in a kindergarten, third grade, fourth grade, and second and third grade split class at Stege Elementary last year, according to the lawsuit.
Most of the student population is Black or African American, nearly 39% in the 2022-23 school year, and Hispanic or Latino, 34%. About 73% of students did not meet grade-level standards in math and 75% did not meet literacy standards.
The lawsuit calls the teacher vacancy problems in the district a “crisis.”
West Contra Costa “faces more teacher vacancies than its neighboring districts and continuously under performs in retaining fully prepared and properly assigned teachers,” the lawsuit says. “Quality teachers are the leading school-related factor contributing to a student’s success.”
Students have complained to the board during public comment about teacher vacancies this past school year, saying they aren’t motivated to attend class with consistently different teachers. One high school student said they weren’t learning any new materials in math class.
According to the lawsuit, the district hasn’t reported any solutions to fill teacher positions and blamed the vacancies on the statewide teacher shortage. The lawsuit gave various solutions, including assigning certified teachers of other subjects to vacant classes, using emergency teaching permits, and hiring university interns and retired teachers.
Last year, West Contra Costa did tap into retirees to help fill vacancies, but it’s unclear how many and if these efforts are continuing. The district has said it can’t hire retired teachers for a full school year, the lawsuit alleges, but attorneys claim that under SB 765, districts can do so.
Problems filling teacher vacancies are also connected to poor working environments, Provenza said. It’s difficult to attract and retain teachers when they don’t feel supported, are overworked, and lose prep periods to cover other classes.
‘This year made staying very challenging’
Educators, parents and community members have fought for better conditions at Stege Elementary for years, and for teacher Sam Cleare, her advocacy efforts began with the 45 Williams complaints.
She called the conditions at Stege “inhumane” and “unbearable” and said there was nowhere to escape the heat.
“Students felt sick,” Cleare said. “I felt lightheaded. Not only was it difficult or impossible to learn, but it felt unsafe as well.”
Sam Cleare, a third-grade teacher, has taken a job with the teachers union.Credit: Andrew Reed / EdSource
Cleare remembers the windows starting to fall apart when trying to open them and said once she cut her finger on the edge of a window. She taught at Stege for the last seven years, and said it was her dream to retire there. But she’s decided to take a job with the teachers union.
“I will miss working at Stege terribly, but this year made staying very challenging,” Cleare said. “Many teachers struggle to stay at the school due to the working conditions.”
On top of teacher vacancies, Stege has battled dwindling enrollment, chronic absenteeism and a long-awaited renovation for nearly a decade. The building was slated to be remodeled by the 2020-21 school year, but there have been delays. Last November, the board approved an increased budget for renovations, from $2.9 million to $43 million, because of the severe need for repairs.
Parents and community members have been frustrated by the delays and lack of funding going toward repairs. The concerns resurfaced at a Stege community meeting last week when parents were calling out district officials for not addressing the health hazards and safety concerns sooner.
District officials shared an annual report on Stege with the community, the Facility Inspection Tool, a visual inspection that determines if a school needs repairs. According to the report, Stege received a “good” rating, which means “the school is maintained in good repair with a number of non-critical deficiencies noted. These deficiencies are isolated, and/or resulting from minor wear and tear, and/or in the process of being mitigated.”
Meeting attendees were outraged by the conclusion of the inspection, which was done last August, and said it was offensive. Parents and educators told stories about sewage coming out of the toilets when flushing, drywall issues, and complained that students were subject to unhealthy conditions.
With the temporary closure of Stege Elementary, students and staff are starting the 2024-25 school year at Dejon Middle School.
Assemblymember Dawn Addis, D-Morro Bay, explains AB 2918 during an Aug. 5 Senate committee hearing.
Credit: Senate Education Committee
A solution to curb antisemitic content they say is infecting some districts’ ethnic studies courses is eluding Jewish legislators. The legislation they authored has failed to gain traction so far, despite the support of State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond and Gov. Gavin Newsom.
Assemblymembers Rick Zbur, D-Los Angeles, and Dawn Addis, D-Morro Bay, are pledging to return next year with a new version of their bill and a bigger coalition behind it. Last week, they pulled Assembly Bill 2918 from consideration amid sharp opposition from the California Teachers Association and college ethnic studies faculty. And they have yet to make the case to the largely progressive Legislature that some ethnic studies courses are problematic, and that it’s not just a Jewish problem.
The bill would have added levels of public review, additional disclosure and additional anti-bias provisions to 2021 law (Assembly Bill 101) that set a mandate for students to take high school ethnic studies as a graduation requirement, starting in 2030-31. Zbur said that he, Addis and the backers are ready to “really start from scratch, put everything on the table, and try to share something that addresses the problem that we are facing.”
The “problem,” they charge, is anti-Israel content that is bleeding over to antisemitism in the classroom. The primary intent of California’s high school ethnic studies is to focus on the historic struggles and achievements of minority groups within the United States. But a collection of groups, called the Coalition for Liberated Ethnic Studies, led primarily by college ethnic studies faculty, have made the Palestinian conflict with Israel a theme of a high school ethnic studies course. They have characterized Israel as an oppressive settler colonialist nation that compels the liberation of Palestine. Jewish families complain that teaching a biased and one-sided view of the conflict has provoked antisemitic remarks, bullying and antagonism toward Jewish students. The courses also stress the continuing harms of white supremacy and corporate capitalism.
More than two dozen unified school districts, including Santa Ana, San Diego, Hayward, San Diego, Oakland, Castro Valley and Berkeley unified school districts, have signed contracts with consultants affiliated with the “liberated” approach to ethnic studies. The groups include the Liberated Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum Consortium, Community Responsive Education, the Association of Raza Educators, and the Xicanx Institute for Teaching and Organizing.
“Unfortunately, we are witnessing harmful situations where, intentionally or not, some ethnic studies curriculum and instruction is creating classrooms that Jewish students are not experiencing as safe, inclusive, or affirming,” Addis said at an Aug. 5 hearing of a Senate committee.
The clash between the Legislative Jewish Caucus and the authors of liberated ethnic studies instruction predates the adoption of the state’s ethnic studies model curriculum framework in 2021. But the ongoing conflict in Gaza, in which 1,200 Israelis were slaughtered and 40,000-plus Palestinians have perished, has heightened tensions. Since Jan. 1, the Office of Civil Rights in the U.S. Department of Education has opened investigations of Berkeley, Oakland and San Francisco unified districts on charges they have failed to respond properly to incidents of antisemitism.
Several UC and CSU ethnic studies faculty advised or participated in creating the first draft of the state’s ethnic studies model curriculum, which the State Board of Education ordered rewritten in 2019 to present a more balanced perspective on race. The final draft excised the initial draft’s endorsement of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against the Israeli government and universities.
Addition of guardrails
At the encouragement of the Legislative Jewish Caucus and Gov. Newsom, Assembly Bill 101 establishing the high school graduation mandate explicitly stated that the Legislature intended for school districts to not use unadopted portions of earlier drafts of the model curriculum.
The law also states that ethnic studies materials and instruction should be appropriate for use with pupils of all races, religions, nationalities and other legally protected student groups and that it “not reflect or promote, directly or indirectly, any bias, bigotry, or discrimination against any person or group of persons.”
California Attorney General Rob Bonta and the Newsom administration have reminded school districts to follow the law’s requirements for “inclusivity, sensitivity, and accuracy.”
“Vendors have begun promoting curriculum to use for ethnic studies courses. We have been advised, however, that some vendors are offering materials that may not meet the requirements of AB 101, particularly the second requirement (not reflecting or promoting any bias, bigotry, or discrimination), an important guardrail highlighted when the bill was signed,” Brooks Allen, executive director of the State Board of Education and an education adviser to Newsom, wrote in a memo to districts a year ago. “Accordingly, before any curriculum or instructional materials for ethnic studies courses are selected, we strongly encourage you to closely scrutinize them to ensure that they meet the above requirements.”
Allen’s guidance does not single out any vendor or group, but the UC Ethnic Studies Faculty Council assumed it was aimed at them. In response, the council denounced the guardrails as censorship. “We vehemently oppose the preemptive restriction of what can be taught, examined, and researched as part of ethnic studies. … In a very real sense, the guardrails are themselves a form of bias, bigotry, and discrimination. California teachers should be able to deliver lessons on important concepts such as settler colonialism, apartheid, and resistance without having to fear censorship or legal action by the state.”
The Legislative Jewish Caucus, however, argues that the “guardrails” and transparency requirements under the law must be more explicit to be effective.
The last version of AB 2918, posted July 3, included compromise language suggested by staff of the Senate Education Committee. Among its key provisions, it called for districts to create a committee to review ethnic studies curriculum and materials prior to adoption. Although the majority would be teachers, it would include parents and guardians and representatives from community organizations “with experience assisting children build cultural awareness and understanding.” The district would notify parents how they could participate in the process or comment on the courses and materials once they are produced.
And, once materials or a curriculum is approved, the school board or superintendent would certify to the California Department of Education that it followed the review process — requirements that do not apply to other academic programs.
Under current law, districts must hold a hearing on a proposed ethnic studies curriculum before adopting it at a second board meeting. But some parents have complained that they were unaware that an ethnic studies course had been adopted, and some boards had placed the curriculum on a “consent” calendar for automatic approval without discussion.
In August 2023, the Washington, D.C.-based Louis Brandeis Center and other legal groups sued Santa Ana Unified school board for violating the Brown Act, the state’s open meeting law, in passing a liberated ethnic studies curriculum without proper notice, and for allowing members in the audience to insult Jewish speakers.
“By failing to intervene in the heckling and harassment of Jewish speakers at its board meeting, the board contributed to creating a hostile environment that prevented Jewish members of the public from fully exercising their right to participate in SAUSD Board meetings as the Brown Act requires,” the lawsuit read.
The bill also would have added another protection to the existing “guardrails” in the current law, that the curriculum “foster respect and acceptance and focus on the experiences of communities of the United States” — as opposed to tensions abroad. The implication is that a lesson on the war in Gaza should incorporate the perspective of Israel and American Jews. And the principle would apply to other minority groups portrayed negatively, he said.
“A lot of people think we are ‘trying to water down the curriculum’ “and steer away from the four primary groups that are the focus of ethnic studies (Blacks, Latinos, Native Americans and Asian Americans), Zbur said at the Aug. 5 Senate hearing. “We’re not. But to the extent there is content that is about or affects other communities, you need to look at how it will be viewed by the community itself.”
A threat to ethnic studies?
Opposition to the bill was strong. In an urgent call to action to ethnic studies supporters at UC Santa Cruz, Christine Hong, professor of critical race and ethnic studies and literature at the university, wrote that AB 2918 would require an extra round of approval and another round of state certification.
“No other K-12 discipline has these requirements — ethnic studies, a field forged by students of color, is specifically being targeted by special political interests,” she wrote. And she charged that undefined community “stakeholders” would be able “to shut down an ethnic studies program if they don’t like what is being taught.”
Seth Bramble, a lobbyist for the California Teachers Association, agreed, saying the bill singled out ethnic studies courses and educators “as the only discipline where we need extra scrutiny and where we need extra red tape to ensure the class is appropriate for all learners.”
“These unnecessary hurdles replicate the very inequality that ethnic studies seek to address, limiting the potential reach and impact of ethnic studies,” he said at the hearing.
Although most of the speakers who identified themselves as Jewish expressed support, Maya Steinhardt, who said she was a Jewish teacher and former Sacramento State student who had spent time at a pro-Palestinian encampment, dissented. “I’m concerned that this bill will result in the same kind of biased education that the authors say they are combating. As the authors stated, marginalized communities should have a voice in how their stories are told. But what happens when different marginalized communities have differing views on the same history? Do you privilege one group’s perception over another?”
The authors and the caucus say that ethnic studies require a different response because it is different. For other subjects — math, English language arts, history, and science — the state has adopted academic standards with a state-led textbook and materials adoption process. For ethnic studies, there is only a voluntary model curriculum framework, leaving it to districts to choose what to teach.
The lack of academic standards, along with a materials review, “makes school districts susceptible to adopting variations of curricula that go beyond the law’s guardrails,” Sen. Josh Becker, D-Menlo Park, and a caucus member, wrote in an email. He said the ethnic studies course at a high school his son attended was “a clear and dramatic violation of the law” on ethnic studies “with obvious factual inaccuracies.”
More time to build support
Zbur and Addis introduced AB 2918 late in the legislative session, leaving too little time to assemble a coalition outside the Legislative Jewish Caucus, Zbur acknowledged. He said he would spend the coming weeks negotiating with education unions, including the CTA, and increasing the support by showing that “these guardrails protect all communities,” not just Jewish Californians.
He said he expects support from Thurmond, who has not participated in negotiations thus far, and Newsom, who committed in his April 2024 Golden State Plan to Counter Antisemitism that he “will work with the Jewish Caucus and Legislature to pursue legislation strengthening the guardrails established by AB 101.”
Along with setting a high school graduation mandate, AB 101 requires that all high schools begin offering an ethnic studies course in 2025-26. In preparation, many school districts will approve courses and materials this year.
AB 2918’s delay could mean the window for affecting that process will close too soon to affect that process in many districts.
Writing in The Progressive, Carol Burris explains why the charter lobby is worried about how the Supreme Court will rule on the case of a religious charter school. They don’t want religious schools to be identified as charter schools. Burris, who is executive director of the Network for Public Education, explains their concern.
She writes:
The National Alliance for Public Charter Schools never met a charter school it did not like—until it met St. Isidore of Seville in Oklahoma City. St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School is the proposed Oklahoma charter school whose fate is currently being consideredby the U.S. Supreme Court, which is expected to issue its decision before summer’s end.
The Alliance’s objection to St. Isidore being allowed to open what would be the nation’s first religious charter is not because the school would be religious—an argument the Alliance’s CEO Starlee Coleman characterizes as an “ivory tower” question—but because, should the Court rule in favor of the religious charter, the decision could jeopardize charter schools having access to public funding, something all charter schools currently depend on. According to the Alliance, every state with charter school laws mandates that charter schools operate as public schools, and the federal Charter School Program, which finances charter expansion, can only fund public charter schools by law. But St. Isidore argues that it should be allowed to open a religious charter because it is a private organization.
So to settle the question of whether St. Isidore can open a religious school, the Supreme Court must decide whether charter schools are public actors, like district schools, or private contractors that provide educational services. Those arguing in favor of St. Isidore claim that, at least in the state of Oklahoma, charter schools are not truly public schools, despite the public label assigned to them by the legislature. But a Court ruling in favor of that argument could set a legal precedent going forward that the public status—and therefore the public funding—of charter schools everywhere is in question.
Oklahoma is one of thirty-four states that require all charter schools to have a private charter school operator—some entity that enters into the agreement to open the school and has a board which governs its operations. Most of these states require the operator to be an incorporated nonprofit, except for Arizona and Delaware, which also permit for-profit charter school governance. In the case of St. Isidore, the nonprofit operator is St. Isidore of Seville Virtual Charter School, Inc.
However, in five states—Alaska, Kansas, Maryland, Montana, and Virginia—the charter school operator is the public school district in which the school is located and the charter school is part of the public school district. In these states, charter schools exist as they were originally intended—as innovative schools largely free of restrictions so they’re better able to serve a purpose the local public school cannot. Alaska’s charter schools, rated by the pro-charter EdNext as the number one charter state for student performance, include Ayaprun Elitnaurvik, a Yugtun immersion charter school. These schools are part of the school district and their teachers enjoy all the rights and protections of being a public school employee.
Seven other states—Arkansas, California, Iowa, Louisiana, Texas, Utah, and Wisconsin—allow both district-run and independent charters. School districts govern 75 percent of all Wisconsin charter schools. Twenty-one percent of California charter schools are dependent charter schools, meaning they are part of a public school district.
Because district-run charter schools are operated directly by the state without a private operator standing in between, these charter schools are government-run entities and would continue to receive public funding no matter the fate of St. Isidore.
An advantage of having charter schools run by public school districts is that they are less apt to be plagued by the fraud and mismanagement issues that are regular occurrences in the charter school sector operated by private entities, such asinsider deals, related party transactions, for-profit operations, and outright financial misappropriation. That’s because, unlike with private operators, school operations—such as procurement, employee compensation, and contracting—are as transparent as in any public school in the district. Teachers are professionally prepared and certified, and can claim the rights and protections of district employees. Parents and voters can voice complaints or concerns to an elected school board that governs all district-run schools, including charter schools.
And yet any suggestion to have charter schools governed exclusively by public school districts so they can continue to operate transparently and receive federal and state funding seems to be the Alliance’s worst nightmare. According to The 74,should the Supreme Court rule in favor of St. Isidore and prompt states to reevaluate the public/private status of charters, the Alliance fears “school districts could just absorb existing charter schools to keep them public, or at least add more government oversight.”
It is difficult to understand why profiteering, a lack of transparency, and the ability to commit fraud would be needed for school innovation. The states that operate charter schools publicly have developed stable and innovative schools responsive to the needs of their community. But the charter lobby will likely fight tooth and nail to preserve the status quo.
The powerful charter chains—with their high-salaried executives, for-profit operator owners, and the real estate empires that have emerged—have enormous sway over charter schools proponents like the Alliance. Within the first five years after the opening of the original charter schools in 1992, four for-profit chains emerged: Leona, Charter Schools U.S.A, National Heritage Academies, and Academica, soon followed by the giant for-profit online charter chains, K12/Stride and Connections Academy. And they, along with corporate nonprofit chains, will work around the clock to protect their interests if the Supreme Court rules in St. Isidore’s favor.
But there may be hope for those who fight for charter school accountability, transparency, and reform. As we contemplate the possibility of a ruling in favor of St. Isidore, we should think deeply about reforms that will restore charter schools to their original mission as places where educators and parents have the freedom to create new learning models in which public schooling is a reality, not just a label.
David McCuan is no stranger to strong disagreements in his political science classes.
“Everything is framed as a life or death struggle and decision, in a very serious way,” said McCuan, a professor at Sonoma State University. “So what I do tell students at the beginning of the class is, ‘We’re going to work hard. We’re going to disagree. And everything is going to be OK, because politics is a game for adults.’”
McCuan should know. Over the past two decades, he’s guided easily 400 budding politicos through an election-year course that teaches them not only how to unearth the money and power structures behind state ballot measures but also asks them to register voters, educate fellow citizens on the election and, quite frequently, work with a student from the opposite end of the political spectrum.
Sonoma State political science professor David McCuanCredit: Courtesy of David McCuan
This fall’s course comes ahead of what McCuan’s syllabus calls “the most important election since 1860” — the election that preceded the Civil War.
In the 2024 election, roughly 8 million youth nationwide will age into the electorate in a divisive election year that has highlighted deep fissures on issues like immigration and the war in Gaza.
It’s also a moment of generational transition. Sonoma students returned to the Rohnert Park campus the same week as the Democratic National Convention, where Vice President Kamala Harris’ brisk rise to the top of the ticket signaled the passing of power to a younger group of Democratic Party politicians.
All of that means fall 2024 could be a volatile time to teach politics, a reason why McCuan wants students to work with peers with whom they don’t see eye to eye. Students entering his classroom even fill out a questionnaire to gauge their political views, information McCuan uses to pair students with their ideological foil on class projects.
“I try to take two opposite individuals and put them together to work on a team to understand what’s going on,” he said, “because I’ve found over the years that actually lends itself to a lot of help for each other.”
The idea behind the class dates to the late 1990s, when as a young academic, McCuan began to contemplate the disconnect between the political science literature — where whether political campaigns even matter is an ongoing subject of debate — and the world of politics as it’s practiced on the ground.
McCuan’s students work with the League of Women Voters to research state ballot measures. The league compiles arguments in favor and against each measure, while students piece together the story of who is funding the ballot issue, how much money they’re spending, which consultants they’ve hired and how those strategies could swing the campaign.
The course also has a service learning component. Students lead a public forum in which they present their ballot measure research to the rest of the campus and receive training on how to register voters. Many interactions with the government can feel punitive, McCuan said, like serving on a jury or paying taxes, so the hope is that more positive experiences of democracy will inspire students to stay civically engaged for the rest of their lives.
“We know that voting is a habit, so if you get people civically minded and engaged to register people to vote or to analyze what’s on the ballot, it has an educative effect,” McCuan said. “The idea is to create something that’s positive about what it means to be civically minded.”
Sonoma State also does not shy away from political science programming that can provoke strong emotions, McCuan said. The university has hosted a lecture series on the Holocaust and genocide, he noted, and McCuan himself teaches a course that examines terrorism and political violence.
McCuan said high-profile events have galvanized youth interest in politics in recent years. The 2016 election of Donald Trump, the 2018 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School and the Supreme Court’s 2022 Dobbs decision holding that abortion is not a constitutional right each emerged as lightning rods for youth political engagement.
Efforts to harness students’ political energy on McCuan’s campus have paid off in the past: 88.3% of registered voters at Sonoma State cast a ballot in 2020, besting the 66% average turnout rate across more than 1,000 colleges and universities in a national study of college voters that year.
It’s not just young people at Sonoma State who are eager to cast a ballot. CIRCLE, the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement at Tufts University, found that turnout for voters age 18 to 29 rose from 39% in 2016 to 50% in 2020.
Will younger voters turn out this year? More than half of voters 18 to 34 told pollsters they were “extremely likely to vote.”
What those numbers don’t show is the long-standing voting gap between college goers and people without a bachelor’s degree. In 2020, 75% of 18- to 29-year-olds with a college degree voted compared to just 39% with a high school education, a CIRCLE analysis of census data found.
McCuan recently discussed why he thinks universities should invest more in civics education and how he prepares students to discuss difficult issues in the classroom.
The following Q&A was edited, condensed and re-ordered for length and clarity.
What should K-12 schools be doing to teach students about civics and politics?
We’re integrating civics rather than holding it separate. We’re trying to integrate things across the curriculum because we have so many things that we want people to learn or that we demand that they know. And I think that’s losing depth of understanding in the guise of trying to provide breadth of coverage.
(In political science), we pay very close attention to the relationship between economic, social and political variables, (also known as) ESP. They (students) might be able to name off ESP components of American history and American politics. It’s the what they’re really good at. It’s the why that is always the struggle.
They might be able to note certain things on the history timeline, but how those were moments of change or inflection points — or why they matter, or how they’re consequential — that’s the part that’s often still the same as it was before. All the stuff they’re covering from K through 12 is ticking off boxes that aren’t necessarily providing greater understanding.
Is there anything that would better prepare students before they reach your classroom?
Invest in civics. I struggle, because I was a department chair for a long time and, as you know, in higher education, it’s faced a lot of pressure and a lot of financial pressure.
I have a great passion about learning. I’m a first generation college student. I’m the son of a cop. I’m not supposed to even be here. The neighborhood I grew up in is the ‘hood, man, and if I can do it, others can do it. It takes a great deal of courage to call things out, and I don’t see that with a lot of higher education leaders, so I need an investment in civics that’s greater.–
And as we’re cutting budgets and we’re cutting requirements, we’re taking things out– like how to write and how to think — because we’re trying to cram other things in there, or graduate people faster, or push things through.
Do you ever have to step in as a conciliator between students in your classroom?
I haven’t generally had to weigh in on severe disagreements. I think your question, though, is appropriate for this fall, where everyone’s made up their mind about how they’re going to vote, except for 5% of people. So I’m going to have people in this class who are on far sides of the political spectrum trying to work together. Can that be combustible? Yeah, sure, maybe.
I just feel like a professor who hadn’t been teaching this course for as long as you have would run in the opposite direction from starting now.
I want a lively, engaged classroom, man!
And also, remember, while we’re looking at the election, paying attention to candidates, we’re also concentrating a lot on non-candidate on ballot measures. Now, those are our proxy for blue and red, for left and right, sure — but we are concentrating on ballot measures, non-candidate elections, so it does remove some of that heavy partisanship.
Do you hear this sentiment among colleagues, a reluctance to talk about political views with students?
What I do hear from colleagues, especially younger colleagues or newer colleagues, is a frustration with trying to delve into issues that are hard. They often avoid those because they’re worried that they won’t have a chair or an administration that will back them up if things get heated.
Sometimes I have newer, younger colleagues who try to steer around issues if it makes students uncomfortable or will lead to aggression in the classroom. I’m not afraid of that.
What makes you not afraid of that?
I trust that we can get to a place of respect, if not understanding. I want a classroom that’s lively, engaged. I think the best thing in a student in my class is intellectual curiosity. That’s what I want. I’m not interested in the politics — and what I mean by that is, I’m not interested that they feel strongly this way or that way. I need them to be intellectually curious, because I can work with that. We can work together on that. And intellectual curiosity is something we see less and less of, so it’s harder.
You don’t strike me as somebody who’s disillusioned with political processes — or are you?
I think to be in this profession, to do this job, you have to have an optimistic view of the human condition. Because you don’t do it for the pay. You don’t do it for the benefits. You do it because you have a passion and a mission that the next generation can do it better.
When you see that ‘aha’ moment with students, it’s not because they’re mimicking your view. It’s not that at all, and I don’t do this in the classroom. It’s that they are understanding and making connections that I never saw. Or that they are finding and understanding in depth and making those connections that are analytical, not political. And that’s really helpful, because that’s a skill.
Is there some way that the students you’re teaching have changed since you started this course in 2003?
They use social media tools to get an idea of what’s going on. So in other words, as the digital space has grown in campaigns, they’re in that space.
I don’t know what the hell a “Swiftie” is. I didn’t know the BeyHive is Beyoncé, and I would have spelled it like a beehive. But they know, so they’re operating in the space where the BeyHive and the Swifties are operating.
They’re understanding that space, and therefore, they are understanding the colors that are used by Kamala and her team, that lime green color. They know what that means, right?
Their understanding of social media, their clarity about what messages are being communicated, would fly over the head of most pointy-headed academics. So I need them.
Head Start programs serve more than 73,000 children in California. Use the map to explore current Head Start programs across the state, including their status and capacity.
)
