اینترنت

دسته: 1

  • What Trump’s victory means for education in California

    What Trump’s victory means for education in California


    Republican Donald Trump and his running mate, Sen. JD Vance, stand on stage at an Election Night watch party at the Palm Beach Convention Center on Nov. 6, 2024, in West Palm Beach, Florida.

    Credit: AP Photo/Evan Vucci

    This story was updated to include comments from Gov. Gavin Newsom and California Teachers Association President David Goldberg.

    The re-election of Donald Trump is certain to bring a period of conflict, tension and litigation between the White House and California’s political and education leaders whose policies and values the president castigates. It also could potentially have major implications for California schools.

    Trump, whose position on education has focused more on cultural ideology than on policies to improve education, has threatened to cut school funding to states, such as California, with policies that protect transgender students and promote diversity, equity and inclusion in their schools. He also has pledged to deport undocumented immigrants en masse, a move that would impact millions of California families and their children.

    “California will seek to work with the incoming president – but let there be no mistake, we intend to stand with states across our nation to defend our Constitution and uphold the rule of law,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom in a statement Wednesday afternoon. “Federalism is the cornerstone of our democracy. It’s the United STATES of America.”

    Newsom, who has been a high-profile adversary to Trump, foreshadowed the coming tensions between the president-elect and the nation’s largest and, by some measures, bluest state in a statement on X, or Twitter, on Oct. 18.

    “Donald Trump just said he will take away $7.9 BILLION in school funding from California’s kids if we don’t do whatever he wants. This man is unhinged and unfit to be President,” wrote Newsom.

     The $7.9 billion represents the total annual federal K-12 funding for California,  about 7% of the total California spending on education in 2024-25, according to state Department of Finance figures. 

    California officials preparing

    Attorney General Rob Bonta has said that his team has been preparing for possible litigation to stop many of President Trump’s expected policies, including attacking rights and protections for transgender children and youth, mass deportation of undocumented immigrants and ending protections for immigrants brought to the U.S. as children.

    California has sued the federal government more than 100 times over Trump’s past rules and regulatory rollbacks, according to CalMatters.

    Bruce Fuller, professor of education and public policy at UC Berkeley, worries that Trump’s tax cuts to the rich will be paid for by budget cuts in public education. 

    “The president-elect’s commitment to cutting taxes for affluent Americans means there will be no new funding for public schools,” Fuller said. “Watch out for efforts to expand vouchers and tax credits for well-off parents who opt for private schools.”

    Trump proposals often contradict policy

    Michael Kirst, former president of the State Board of Education and chief education advisor to former Governor Jerry Brown, said there is a contradiction between what Trump proposes and federal education policy.

     “He says he wants to turn control back to locals, but his campaign platform and statements indicate a deep interest in getting involved in local decision-making: having parents elect principals, cutting back teacher tenure and instituting merit pay,” Kirst said. “He wants to examine the curriculum of schools for ‘woke’ ideology.”

    The Every Student Succeeds Act, the primary law governing federal education policy, limits federal involvement in education, Kirst said. ESSA bans federal intervention in setting curriculum and federal involvement with teacher evaluations, which will affect Trump’s plan to offer merit pay. 

    “Some of his aides talk about slashing K-12 spending, but who knows what will happen?” Kirst said. Congress could transfer some funding for schools to create incentives for school choice, but that would require changes in school law, he said.

    Student debt relief at risk

    A second Trump administration could have far-reaching consequences for Americans with student debt, said Mike Pierce, the executive director of the Student Borrower Protection Center, in a statement. 

    “President-elect Trump’s dark vision for millions of American families with student debt is as extreme as it is unpopular—dismantling the U.S. Department of Education, undoing hard-fought protections for student loan borrowers, driving millions into the open arms of predatory for-profit schools and private lenders, and leaving millions drowning in student debt,” Pierce said. “The threat posed by these plans is real and will imperil the financial stability of millions of working families.”

    Deportation promise causing fear

    The Trump proclamation that has evoked the most fear for Californians is his pledge to deport undocumented immigrants en masse. An estimated 1 million California children – about 1 in 10 – have an undocumented immigrant parent. About 165,000 California students are recent immigrants themselves.  In 2016, after Trump’s first election, attendance at schools dropped.

    In a call with reporters last week, Newsom said that Trump’s promise to deport undocumented immigrants would be devastating to California’s economy, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.

    “No state has more to lose or more to gain in this election in November,” he said.

    Speaker of the Assembly Robert Rivas told reporters the state would be ready to forcefully protect its immigrant population, which could face major upheaval under Trump’s proposed mass deportation program, according to Politico.

     “We’ll do everything we can to ensure that people feel protected, and they feel welcomed,” he said, though he did not discuss specifics.

    Manuel Rustin, an American History teacher at John Muir High School, an early college magnet program in Pasadena Unified, said his students have expressed concern and angst over what a second Trump presidency might be like, considering the intense anti-immigrant sentiment of his campaign and his promise of mass deportations. 

    “I expect students today will be very quiet, melancholy, confused, and worried like I witnessed them back in 2016,” Rustin said. “My plan: Similar to 2016, I plan to hold space for students to safely express their thoughts, reactions, and questions.”

    Scott Moore, head of Kidango, a nonprofit that runs many Bay Area child care centers, fears that many of the families he works with will be terrified today.

    “What is sad is that today, children will come to Kidango, and some of them will be crying and scared that their parents or a close relative will be taken away from them,” Moore said. “This is what happened in 2016.”

    Teachers in the crosshairs

    A Trump presidency also could have a big impact on how educators teach and on whether they choose to stay in the profession. Trump has claimed teachers have been indoctrinating children with anti-American ideologies. His solution: create a new credentialing agency to certify teachers “who embrace patriotic values and understand that their job is not to indoctrinate children, but to educate them.” 

    He also wants to abolish teacher tenure and to give preference in federal funding to states and school districts that support his efforts to do so. 

    “He will go after teacher associations backing Democrats, with a vengeance,” Fuller predicts.

    California Teachers Association President David Goldberg said that, as a union of 310,000 educators, CTA has the strength to fight for the state’s students, schools and communities.

    “We are prepared to stand up against any attacks on our students, public education, workers’ rights, and our broader communities that may come,” Goldberg said. “We’re committed to fight for the future we all deserve.”





    Source link

  • California education leaders try to reassure students of protections against Trump policies

    California education leaders try to reassure students of protections against Trump policies


    In this Jan. 25, 2017, file photo, protesters rally outside of City Hall in San Francisco in the wake of Donald Trump’s first election as president..

    Credit: AP Photo/Jeff Chiu,file

    Este artículo está disponible en Español. Léelo en español.

    When Alejandra Lopez saw swing states that had gone for Joe Biden in 2020 leaning red for Donald Trump on Tuesday night, it felt like déjà vu.

    “I was really distraught. Honestly, I really would have never thought I would see him having a second term in office,” said Lopez, who is a second-year political science student at Cal Poly Pomona.

    For Lopez, the stakes were personal. Both of her parents are undocumented immigrants from Mexico who have lived in the U.S. for almost 20 years. Trump has pledged to enact mass deportation of undocumented immigrants.

    When Trump won for the first time in 2016, Lopez was 11 years old. She remembers feeling scared that her parents — or even she, a U.S. citizen — would be deported and crying all day in class. Now, she feels more angry.

    “I’m angry that he was elected into office again, that he has promised the same thing again, and that people keep perpetuating it and moving it forward, not recognizing how harmful it can be,” she said. “You look back, and you see that time and time again, he’s just rephrased the same hate that he’s spewed.”

    Many California children and their families, including immigrants, transgender students and Black and Latino students, among others, are feeling similar fear and uncertainty, after the election of a candidate who has threatened to deport undocumented immigrants en masse, and to cut school funding to states that protect transgender students and promote diversity, equity and inclusion in their schools.

    California education leaders and advocates said the fear is palpable and justifiable, but they also urged TK-12 schools, colleges and universities to make sure students and families know about policies to protect their rights, some of which were enacted during the first Trump administration.

    An estimated 1 million California children — about 1 in 10 — have an undocumented immigrant parent, the state estimates. Many more have undocumented family members. About 165,000 California students are recent immigrants themselves.

    “If we thought teaching was hard yesterday, wait for today’s questions like, “Is Trump going to send me back to the gangs?” and “Is he going to deport my mother/father/brother/cousin?” wrote teacher Larry Ferlazzo on X (formerly Twitter) Wednesday.

    Xilonin Cruz-González, deputy director of the advocacy organization Californians Together, said schools must reach out now to immigrant families to ensure they feel welcome and safe in school.

    “Even though it feels scary, especially for immigrant families, because of the rhetoric we’ve heard through the election cycle and we anticipate we will continue to hear, it’s important to remember, especially in California, we have legal protections for immigrant students,” Cruz-González said. “We have federal protections that require us to make sure our schools are safe and welcoming for all students. And we have California laws, especially AB 699, that was passed in 2017, that requires school districts to ensure that our immigrant students are welcomed into our public schools.”

    The U.S. Supreme Court established in 1982, in the case Plyler vs. Doe, that all children have a right to a free public education, regardless of their immigration status.

    California’s Assembly Bill 699 was passed in response to the previous Trump administration’s immigration enforcement and the fear it caused among immigrant families in California. The bill instructs schools not to collect information about families’ immigration status unless required by law, and requires schools to pass policies limiting assistance with immigration enforcement at public schools, among other things.

    Lindsey Bird was a newcomer teacher, working with recent immigrant students in 2016 when Trump was first elected. She said she had Syrian refugee students in tears that day.

    “They felt like their humanity was on the ballot, and they lost,” she said.

    Bird now works with Teach Plus California, coaching teachers throughout the state on how best to teach English learners. She said teachers are “heartbroken” for their students after Tuesday’s election and eager to share information with their students about their rights.

    “One teacher told me, ‘I’ll let myself grieve for the remainder of the week, but then I feel like my mama bear mode has been activated because I feel like I have to protect my students,’” Bird said. “So she was asking, ‘How can I protect them? What are my rights? What are their rights?’”

    Megan Stanton-Trehan, a senior attorney at Disability Rights California who represents students with disabilities, said she saw many students with disabilities and students of color struggle during the last Trump presidency.

    “I am really concerned about my clients who have disabilities, who are students of color, who are transgender,” said Stanton-Trehan. “In California, we may have a state that is protecting those students to some degree. We have laws that protect them here that are not dependent upon the way the federal government interprets the law, but that’s a lot of burden to put on the state.”

    She said that the lessons of that first term, however, are in the power of people standing up to such policies.

    “I think it’s definitely more than ever a time to really center those students and their needs and, really, their voices too,” Stanton-Trehan said. “They’re the next generation, and they’re living through this as well. They’re the ones at the forefront. If there’s any silver lining, it’s perhaps how galvanizing this can be for young people to say enough is enough.”

    State Attorney General Rob Bonta has said that his team is preparing to protect immigrants, transgender students and others, with possible litigation against Trump’s expected policies.

    “Fortunately, and unfortunately, we have four years of Trump 1.0 under our belts. We know what to expect, and we won’t be caught flat-footed,” said a Bonta spokesperson. “California’s Legislature has enacted strong protections for the rights of all students in California, and the Department of Justice will ensure those protections are enforced across the state. We are paying attention to what Trump and his advisers have said about their plans for a second administration, and we will be prepared to defend California’s values.”

    U.C. Berkeley political science professor Dan Schnur said Gov. Gavin Newsom has battled Trump before, but faces a new reality with Harris’ loss.

    “Newsom’s challenge is going to be balancing what’s best for him as governor and what’s best for him as a potential presidential candidate,” Schnur said.

    And Trump recognizes, Schnur said, “how much he can benefit politically with his base by beating up on California. The question is how he decides how much of that political benefit can be realized by threats and how much can be realized through follow-up on those threats.”

    Trump’s campaign promise of shutting down the U.S. Department of Education is an example.

    Such a move “is a long, long, long shot,” Schnur said “Even if Republicans do win a House majority, he’s going to have a lot of members here who are reluctant to cast that vote.”

    But Trump’s railing against transgender people and false claims that children receive gender reassignment surgeries at public schools may keep political traction, Schnur said.

    “I think that debate is much more likely to be central to his agenda.”

    LGBTQ+ youth were a major focus of this election season up and down the ballot, according to Jorge Reyes Salinas, communications director for LGBTQ+ civil rights organization Equality California. 

    Trump attacked transgender women playing sports and gender-affirming care for transgender youth. Local school board candidates promoted policies that outed transgender students to their parents, in opposition to a new state law. Anti-bullying policies at local school districts that specifically name LGBTQ youth have become a flash point.

    California already has laws on the books that protect these communities, and Salinas noted that voters supported Proposition 3, which enshrines the right to same-sex marriage.

    “I think being in California does provide a peace of mind,” Salinas said.

    Equality California will be working with other organizations to ensure that there are no gaps in protecting LGBTQ+ youth in California, and that state laws that do support them are implemented. 

    Some school districts, including Los Angeles Unified, sent messages out to parents prior to or during Election Day, highlighting protections for students and offering mental health support for students experiencing anxiety or fear after the election.

    The union representing teachers in LAUSD, United Teachers Los Angeles, issued a statement saying that “Ensuring that students and their families are informed and safe will always be our top priority. We are committed to ensuring that every LAUSD student, especially BIPOC, immigrant, and LGBTQIA+ students, has access to the education, resources, and support they deserve.”

    Some colleges and universities sent similar messages to students. Santa Monica College sent a message to students before the election to offer counseling and “debriefing” spaces for all students, but particularly for LGBTQ students, undocumented students and “racially minoritized communities.” In a Nov. 6 message, San Francisco State University President Lynn Mahoney encouraged students to seek support from campus counseling services as well as groups including the Dream Resource Center and the Queer & Trans Resource Center.

    Higher education officials in California are well aware they could face legal and funding challenges from the Trump administration on such issues as enrolling undocumented students, free speech and diversity, equity and inclusion. In a rare move Wednesday, the leaders of California’s three public higher education systems shared a joint statement emphasizing that their campuses are welcoming to students and staff from all backgrounds.

    “Following the presidential election results, we understand that there is a great deal of uncertainty and anxiety within California’s higher education community,” reads the statement, which was signed by Michael Drake, president of the University of California; Mildred García, chancellor of the California State University; and Sonya Christian, chancellor of California Community Colleges.

    “The University of California, the California State University, and the California Community Colleges remain steadfast and committed to our values of diversity and inclusivity,” they added.

    Ju Hong, director of the UCLA Dream Resource Center, said Trump’s call for mass deportation is stoking fear among undocumented students and students who are citizens but have family members who are undocumented.

    Hong said there’s also concern that the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program could get terminated by the courts during Trump’s presidency. Hong himself is a DACA recipient. If the program gets terminated, he wouldn’t be able to keep his job and would be at risk of deportation. 

    Hong called on UC leaders, including the system’s board of regents, to support immigrant students and staff, both with public statements of support and by advocating for more funding for programs like the Dream Resource Center.

    “Hopefully they think through what are some creative ways to proactively support immigrant students on and off campus,” Hong said.

    Kevin R. Johnson, professor and former dean of the UC Davis School of Law, said he is concerned that the election of Trump to a second presidency could deter undocumented students from attending public universities, even in California, where they are eligible for in-state tuition and where all three public college and university systems have legal services for undocumented students and family members.

    “I do think that over the next few months, we will see a great deal of fear and consternation in the immigrant community, including the immigrant student community,” Johnson said. “I fear that the general tenor and thrust of President Trump and some others about immigrants can chill undocumented students from attending a public university and be worried that any appearance in public places could lead to their removal.”





    Source link

  • School board results show wins on conservative and progressive sides

    School board results show wins on conservative and progressive sides


    Political signs for the Placentia-Yorba Linda Unified school board are on display at an intersection in Yorba Linda.

    Credit: Courtesy of Kevin Reed

    Election results for California’s school boards are still not final in most counties, but the dust is settling in some of the state’s most hotly contested races.

    This year, California teachers unions and conservative groups intensified efforts to get their favored candidates elected to district school boards. Their primary difference of opinion — educational policies on gender identity and racial equity.

    In June, voters recalled Temecula Valley Unified school board President Joseph Komrosky — one of a three-member conservative block that passed controversial policies to reject textbooks with materials that included references to gay rights activist Harvey Milk, ban critical race theory and require teachers and school staff to notify parents if a child appears to be transgender. 

    But Komrosky and a new conservative majority could be back in January. As of Thursday evening, he and candidates Melinda Anderson and Emil Roger Barham — all endorsed by the Riverside County Republican Party — were winning their races.

    Komrosky is narrowly edging out opponent David Sola in the race for Trustee Area 4, with 51.21% of the vote — a little more than 300 votes — as of about 5:30 p.m. Thursday. Sola is endorsed by the Temecula Valley Educators Association, the district’s teachers union.

    “During this historic election season, I’m confident Temecula will choose trustees devoted to prioritizing academics, honoring parents, protecting children, and (keeping) divisive ideology out of the classroom,” said Jennifer Wiersma, who was part of the board’s conservatively held majority, in a statement to EdSource. Wiersma represents Trustee Area 3.

    Riverside County still had 350,000 mail-in and conditional ballots to be counted on Wednesday.

    The seats of the two board members who pushed back against the conservative majority — Steven Schwartz and Allison Barclay — are also up for election. Currently, Schwartz leads challenger Jon Cobb with 51.64% of the vote in Trustee Area 5, while Barclay is losing with 41.50% of the votes to Anderson’s 58.50% in Trustee Area 1.

    The Area 4 and Area 2 seats have been empty since Komrosky’s recall in June and the resignation of board member Danny Gonzalez last December.

    Both Cobb and Komrosky are supported by the Inland Empire Family PAC, a conservative Christian political action committee. Cobb is also endorsed by the Riverside County Republican Party.

    Barclay, Schwartz and Gary Oddi are endorsed by the teachers union. Oddi is running against Barham and Angela Talarzyk for the Trustee Area 2 seat.

    San Jose Unified results mixed

    Nicole Gribstad, endorsed by the Santa Clara County branch of Moms for Liberty, could take the Trustee Area 5 seat on the San Jose Unified school board, despite heavy campaigning against her by the teachers union. 

    Moms for Liberty is a national group that has supported efforts to bar schools from teaching about race, gender and sexuality. If Gribstad wins, she will be the only conservative member of the board, said San Jose Teachers Association President Renata Sanchez.  

    Gribstad is leading with 44.93% of the votes, only 870 votes more than union-endorsed candidate Lenka Wright.

    “We are not quite ready to call the race yet,” Sanchez said.  

    The county had about 284,000 ballots left to count at 10 a.m. Thursday, according to the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters.

    “(If she wins) we will continue to do everything we can to protect our students from these policies, including working with the board to make sure they understand how policies impact the work at the site level, ensure that our policies and processes are in alignment with those from CSBA (California School Boards Association),” Sanchez said. 

    “The parental rights policies, book bans and anti-DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) policies are coming from a loud minority, and are not indicative of what the community as a whole desires for their children,” she said.

    Teresa Castellanos, the union’s other endorsement in the San Jose Unified race, seems likely to take the Trustee Area 1 seat with an overwhelming 59.47% of the vote compared to 40.53% for Chris Webb.

    Orange Unified incumbents winning

    Orange Unified School District incumbents Ann Page, Sara Pelly and Stephen Glass seem to have handily won re-election in Orange County. All three incumbents had between 72% to 80% of the votes in their trustee areas by 5 p.m. Wednesday.

    The county reported there were about 364,000 ballots left to process on Thursday evening.

    Pelly, in Trustee Area 4, and Glass, in Trustee Area 7, completed the terms of Madison Miner and Rick Ledesma, who were recalled in April, after Superintendent Gunn Marie Hansen was abruptly fired without explanation. Neither Miner nor Ledesma sought re-election.

    Orange Unified recall organizer Darshan Smaaladen said interest in local races has grown since culture wars made their way into school district boardrooms. 

    “We have seen greater interest in the high quality and motivation of school board candidates, which is a great thing,” Smaaladen said in a statement to EdSource. “Greater interest equals greater engagement; public schools shine brighter in the light of transparency and truth from this interest.”

    Santa Ana Unified surprise

    In what could be an upset, special education teacher and conservative candidate Brenda Lebsack is edging out incumbent Rigo Rodriquez for the Trustee Area 1 seat on the Santa Ana school board, 52.16% to 47.84%. 

    The district has three seats up for election. Valerie Magdaleno is handily beating opponent Lloyd Boucher-Reyes, 72.5% to 24.75% in Trustee Area 2, while incumbent Alfonso Alvarez has 59% of the vote in a three-way race for the Area 3 seat.

    Recalled Sunol Glen trustee losing

    School board policies focusing on gender identification and LGBTQ+ rights continue to be a hot-button issue in some districts this election season.

    Ryan Jergensen played a role in passing conservative policies associated with gender identity and the display of flags, including the Pride flag, while a trustee for the Sunol Glen Unified School District in Alameda County. Now, he is trying to reclaim his board seat.

    On Wednesday at 1 a.m. he was losing to Erin Choin, 41% to 59%.

    LA Unified filling three seats

    The Los Angeles Unified School District board will go through a drastic change in leadership this election cycle — with three of its seven seats up for grabs. 

    Board President Jackie Goldberg, representing District 5, along with board member George McKenna from District 1, announced their retirement last fall after decades in education. Their seats — along with the District 3 seat currently occupied by board Vice President Scott Schmerelson, are on the ballot this November. 

    United Teachers Los Angeles, the district’s teachers union, and charter school organizations have been battling over board seats. The union mobilized its 39,000 members and ran campaigns in two of the districts, said Julie Van Winkle, vice president of the union.

    As of 4:34 p.m. Thursday, all three union-endorsed candidates — Sherlett Hendy Newbill, Schmerelson and Karla Griego — were winning their races. Only the District 3 race between Schmerelson, 51.91%, and Dan Chang, 48.09%, was close.

    District 7’s seat was on the ballot last March — and board member Tanya Ortiz Franklin secured her next term with support from 55.91% of voters. 

    In addition to deciding the makeup of LAUSD’s school board, voters determined the fate of a substantive $9 billion school construction bond to upgrade LAUSD school facilities. It needs at least 55% of the vote to pass, and has secured just over 66% of the vote so far. 

    West Contra Costa race close

    Early returns in the West Contra Costa Unified race show incumbent Otheree Christian trailing challenger Guadalupe Enllana by about 400 votes, according to results published early Wednesday morning. Enllana had nearly 53% of the vote. 

    Enllana, a member of the district’s Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) committee, has been critical of the district’s financial management and the school board’s failure to adopt an LCAP, which in turn prevented the district from passing a budget by the deadline.

    Otheree, a graduate of the district’s Kennedy High School and a substitute teacher, was elected in 2020. As trustee, he abstained from voting on the accountability plan because the document lacked transparency and failed to include parent feedback.





    Source link

  • California schools chief pledges to resist cuts in funding if Trump axes U.S. Dept. of Education

    California schools chief pledges to resist cuts in funding if Trump axes U.S. Dept. of Education


    Surrounded by education leaders from around the state, California Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond reacts to President-elect Donald Trump’s education agenda at a news conference in Sacramento on Nov. 8, 2024.

    Credit: California Department of Education

    California State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond vowed on Friday to fight President-elect Donald Trump’s pledge to abolish the U.S. Department of Education, which he said represented a “clear threat to what our students need to have a good education and a great life.”

    “We cannot be caught flatfooted,” Thurmond said, during a news conference.

    Thurmond made his pronouncement in Sacramento on Friday while flanked by legislators and education and labor leaders holding up signs saying “Education Is For Everyone” and “Protect All Students.”

    Throughout his presidential campaign, Trump has vowed to abolish the department, a long-standing and so far unfulfilled pledge made by Republican leaders dating back to former President Ronald Reagan.

    Thurmond said there are concerns that abolishing the department would put at risk some $8 billion that California receives in federal funds for programs serving students with disabilities and those attending low-income schools, both public and private.

    “We will not allow that to happen,” he said. “The law will not allow that to happen.”

    He observed, for example, that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, known as IDEA, guarantees students in special education programs a “free and appropriate education,” and to receive a range of special education services in an individualized education program drawn up for every special education student.

    Thurmond said Trump’s plan to defund the Department of Education would also harm students whose civil rights are violated and investigated through the Office of Civil Rights, including victims of racism, antisemitism, Islamophobia, hate and bias toward LGBTQ students.

    “To tear down and abolish an organization that provides protections for our students is a threat to the well-being of our students and our families and of Americans,” Thurmond said.

    It was also not clear what would happen to student financial aid that the department administers, Thurmond said.

    The first line of defense in the fight against Trump’s education plan is the Congress, Thurmond said. He said his department is reaching out to legislators to affirm their commitment to public education — an issue that he says surpasses partisan labels.

    “Let me be clear,” Thurmond said. “This is not a partisan issue. This is an issue of continuing to assure that students have access to the resources that they are entitled to under the law. And we will continue to do that, and we will work with the members of Congress to ask them to stand and support our students.”

    But Thurmond said that the California Department of Education is also preparing for a worst-case scenario: large-scale cuts to federal funding. In that case, he said, he is working with the California Legislature on a backup plan.

    “If it comes to it, as a contingency, we are prepared to introduce legislation that would backfill funding for special education programs, Title I programs and programs that are similar in its scope,” Thurmond said. Title I money supplements state and local education funding for low-income students.

    Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi, D-Torrance, the chair of the Assembly Education Committee, said that the state is prepared to stand up for all the students who are targeted by Trump’s policy proposals and rhetoric. He pointed to the threat of deportations of undocumented immigrants that would hurt large numbers of children of immigrants, as well as threats to other student populations.

    “It is the job of every teacher, every school board member, every principal, every elected representative in the state of California who believes in public education, it is time for us to stand up to protect all of these kids,” he said. “When we are facing a bully who is targeting our most vulnerable students, we all need to stand up.”

    “We need to get ready now for what is going to start on Jan. 20,” Muratsuchi said, referring to Trump’s second inauguration.

    In 2017, California enshrined into state law some federal laws or court decisions to protect the education rights of immigrant students, said Xilonin Cruz-Gonzalez, deputy director of Californians Together, a statewide coalition that advocates for immigrants and multilingual learners.

    In the wake of Trump’s attacks on immigrants, Cruz-Gonzalez said it is important to remind school staff of those protections so that students and families will continue to feel safe and protected when they attend school.

    “It’s not enough to know that we have laws on the books,” Cruz-Gonzalez said. “We have to work together in coalition and ensure our superintendents, our school board members and our teachers know what to do to protect these rights.”

    The right to public education is the “cornerstone of democracy,” said Chinua Rhodes, school board member at Sacramento City Unified School District.

    “This is not just a political battle, it is a moral one,” Rhodes said. “Our schools should not abandon the most needy.”

    Louis Freedberg contributed to this report.





    Source link

  • A district practice that breaks hearts and squashes teacher morale

    A district practice that breaks hearts and squashes teacher morale


    You’re being excessed.

    Those three little words uttered by my principal at the first staff meeting, my first day back at work, three days before the start of the school year. Excessed. Numbly, I stumble out of the meeting and make my way back to my classroom. I sit in the new green chair I had just purchased to match the decor for my universal transitional kindergarten class. I sit and stare at my classroom, trying to process what has just happened. Excessed. I have to pack my personal belongings and supplies. Excessed. I have to take everything off the walls. Excessed. Where am I going to put all these boxes? What school and grade will I be moving to, and when? Excessed.

    Excessing, also known as involuntary transfer, occurs when schools have a lower number of enrolled students than were projected, and now there are too many teachers at one site. Districts move teachers between schools to fill vacancies that can open, partially due to higher/lower than expected enrollment, funding shifts, teacher retirement, etc. Excessing a teacher from their site usually happens in the spring, at the end of the school year.

    Fall excessing, or being transferred to a new school/grade in the time after the new school year has begun, is rarely voluntary. It is a heartbreaker and destroys a teacher’s spirit due to the emotional investment that teachers put into their classrooms and their future students at the start of each new school year.

    I explained fall excessing to my husband, a retired school bus driver, like this: “Imagine someone tells you that they have too many bus drivers and they need you to now drive a dump truck in a brand-new city. You know how to drive, you’ve been doing it for ages, and you are well trained to drive vehicles. However, you’ve never driven a dump truck before, and you’ve never driven in this new city. There is no new training for driving a dump truck, and you are expected to master the new vehicle, new city and its rules within two days.”

    Sounds great, right?

    In the spring of 2024 my union, San Diego Education Association, and my district came to an agreement to “minimize fall staffing movement.” This signed and approved contract agreement is supposed to encourage the district to sort out their enrollment numbers well before the start of the school year. The idea behind the agreement is to reduce the chances of a teacher being moved after school has already started. But it wasn’t enough to keep me from being excessed.

    So I call for reinforcements. A teacher friend whose district hasn’t started yet gets busy packing up my old classroom. My husband loads my new green chair into his truck and takes it home. Eight hours later, my personal classroom items are making their way onto two pallets, headed to the school’s multipurpose room, while a stunned teacher who has been moved down two grade levels is making his way into the classroom to now teach transitional kindergarten.

    My former classroom looks like it’s been pillaged, with leftover boxes, rolls of tape and a steady stream of boxes from the new teacher. The once sunny and bright room looks sad and forlorn, like she’s having trouble letting me go, as I am struggling to let her go as well.

    I grapple with the hopes and dreams I had for these new students, whose names were already written on their tables, and etched on my heart. The students will be fine, they will only know one teacher, the one taking my place, three days before the official start of school. But I will always know that they were mine first.

    The next few days are a blur of packing the last few boxes, crying, showing the new teacher the curriculum, crying and talking to union reps and the human resources department at my district. I feel crushed, unimportant, deflated. I am dismayed to hear that I have to stay on my campus for, a minimum of three weeks, but likely more like six or seven weeks. As a newly excessed teacher, I have to wait until the official fall excess date, typically the third or fourth Friday of September, before I know where the district will place me. In the meantime, I will remain on my campus as a support teacher. It is a painful reminder of who I am to the school district. A body, an ID number. A bus driver who can be told to drive a dump truck.

    In an ironic plot twist, only half of the district’s excessed teachers were moved to new school sites. The other half, myself included, were allowed to stay at our current schools. To reduce the number of combo classes, I was directed to teach a newly created first grade class. At this point, I felt like a pawn in a mysterious chess game, with the rules only known to the upper administration.

    I’m just a teacher who was excited to get ready for going back to school, but instead was delivered a big dose of fall excessing. I took my green chair with me to my new classroom, but it wasn’t the same. I left a little piece of me in that former classroom and with those students who were supposed to be mine.

    •••

     Kelly Gonzales is a primary grade teacher at a Title 1 school in San Diego, and a teacher leader with the California Reading and Literature Project.

    The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • Bay Area district settles suit alleging inequitable education practices

    Bay Area district settles suit alleging inequitable education practices


    Black students and English learners were disproportionately placed in special education in Pittsburg Unified, according to a lawsuit recently settled.

    Alison Yin/EdSource

    A Bay Area school district has settled a lawsuit claiming that Black students and English learners were denied a proper education and were disproportionately suspended, expelled or funneled into special education classrooms offering poor instruction.

    Pittsburg Unified School District in Contra Costa County reached the settlement on Oct. 23 in a suit filed in 2021 by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Northern California and the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund.

    As part of the agreement, the district agreed to hire two independent consultants to help address the issues raised in the case — the district’s disciplinary practices, special education placement and literacy education for students with disabilities, especially English learners. 

    “This is an excellent settlement that is an important step in the right direction for Pittsburg Unified,” said Linnea Nelson, senior staff attorney at the ACLU of Northern California. “It seeks to dismantle past practices that have marginalized students, particularly Black students, English learners and disabled students.”

    The case

    The lawsuit claimed that the district illegally denied meaningful instruction to Black students, students with disabilities and English learners; that special education teachers were not trained to teach disabled students grade-level standards, and that general education teachers were not trained to differentiate their instruction for disabled students.

    According to the complaint, one plaintiff, special education teacher Michell Redfoot, claimed that the district dissuaded teachers from holding special education students to the same standards as general education students. Another plaintiff, Mark S., an English learner with autism, spent his school days doing arts and crafts and watching Disney movies, instead of learning to read and write.

    Pittsburg Unified meted out discipline, including suspensions and expulsions, to disabled students and Black students at disproportionate rates, the complaint stated. The district had one of the largest disparities between Black and white students in the state for days of instruction missed due to disruption or defiance, according to the suit. It also claimed that Black students were transported to psychiatric wards at three times the rate of other students. 

    Jessica Black says her daughter, who has since graduated from high school, is still traumatized from an incident when she was in the sixth grade and the school called police, strapped her to a gurney and transported her to a psychiatric ward.

    “The fact that the state sanctions this level of violence — that we pay for with tax dollars — is egregious,” Black said.

    After the approval of the settlement at a meeting on Oct. 23, Pittsburg Unified board President Heliodoro Moreno read a statement on behalf of the board, stating that district practices affecting Black students, English learners and disabled students were not consistent with a district that views itself as a champion of equity and inclusivity. 

    “For instance, Black/African American students have and continue to have suspensions at a disproportionate rate than their peers,” according to the statement. “Our system requires consistent courage, honest dialogue, and continuous growth to interrupt practices that lead to disproportionate outcomes for our scholars, especially for some of our African American scholars and scholars receiving special education services.”

    The settlement

    Superintendent Janet Schulze said the district had been working to address issues even before the suit was filed and that the settlement process will ultimately improve the district in the long run.

    “The settlement agreement is focused on areas where we still have work to do, and I see it as a positive outcome of a hard process,” Schulze said in a statement to EdSource.

    The district agreed to hire two independent experts who will create a plan to address the issues.

    One expert, Mildred Browne, will address how the district disciplines students and places students into special education, while the other, Linda Cavazos, will address the district’s early literacy program for special education students with an emphasis on English learners.

    The district had previously been working with Browne and recognized the importance of retaining her.

    “It will allow us to continue and deepen the work we have been doing and were already doing when we were served with the lawsuit,” Schulze stated in an email to EdSource.

    Under the agreement, working with the district, Browne and Cavazos will create a plan by next May, and then, through 2028-29, monitor the district’s progress in implementing their recommendations. They will submit reports twice a year that will be publicly presented to the board.

    The district had previously come under scrutiny for its special education practices. The 2021 suit alleges that the district failed to implement recommendations to improve special education evaluations made in 2016 by Frances Stetson, another consultant. 

    According to Stetson’s report, “the positives to report are few and the concerns are many.” It noted that the district fell below the state requirement that disabled students spend at least 80% of their day in a general education classroom — a concern echoed in the 2021 suit.

    Nelson, the ACLU attorney, is hopeful that the district will address the issues this time because the settlement agreement is legally binding with accountability measures. 

    She added that the district has already taken important steps demonstrating good faith, such as eliminating “willful defiance” as a reason for suspension, ahead of a statewide requirement.

    Pittsburg Unified was flagged by the California Department of Education for having significant “disproportionality“, which happens when students of a certain race or ethnicity in a district are three times more likely to be identified as having a disability, receiving discipline or being placed in special education for three years in a row.

    Black students at Pittsburg Unified were more likely to be identified as having an emotional disability or other health impairment. But Schulze said the district is no longer flagged for significant disproportionality.

    Malhar Shah, an ACLU attorney who previously worked on the case as an attorney for the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, said the settlement could create a program that is a model for other districts.

    Literacy is a hot-button topic in education right now, but Shah said that literacy instruction in California doesn’t always address the individual needs of a student. For instance, plaintiff Mark S. has unique needs as both an English learner and a student with autism. Teachers in California need training on how to best support all students with evidence-based literacy instruction, Shah said.

    However, Black, one of the parent plaintiffs in the suit, is not optimistic that the settlement will result in the serious change that students like her daughter would have needed. Her daughter’s time at Pittsburg Unified was marked by fighting to get her daughter the social-emotional support and tutoring she needed, Black said. But even under the threat of litigation, her daughter’s education didn’t improve. She said she lost faith in the district and the state of California.

    Ultimately, Black pulled her daughter out of Pittsburg Unified and sent her to St. Paul, Minnesota, to live with family members. She thrived in the school system there, graduating from high school early. A teacher at Pittsburg Unified told her daughter that welding or manual labor were her only career options. Black is proud that her daughter is currently studying to be a registered nurse.

    She said educators in Minnesota “stopped, paused and listened” to her daughter, and “considered what she needed.”

    The case against Pittsburg Unified also named the state of California as a defendant, claiming that, by not intervening, the state failed to protect students’ fundamental right to an education. The state settled its part of the case separately this summer.

    Shah said the state previously took a “hands-off approach,” relying on school districts to monitor themselves when data showed that certain racial or ethnic groups were disproportionately harmed by school practices.

    The state agreed in a settlement to monitor districts much more closely by reviewing individual student files, observing classrooms and conducting interviews. 

    Malhar said this is important because there are plenty of problems in school districts that don’t “pop up on paper.”





    Source link

  • Financial aid fraud is growing at California’s community colleges

    Financial aid fraud is growing at California’s community colleges


    The Foothill-De Anza Community College District is one of many across the state trying to combat bad actors who enroll to steal financial aid. The district, which includes Foothill College, shown above, is now using artificial intelligence to sniff our scammers.

    Credit: Barbara Kinney

    Since the Covid-19 pandemic, California’s community colleges have been plagued by scammers who pose as students and enroll to steal financial aid — and now it’s getting even worse. 

    The state’s 116-college system has lost more than $7.5 million to financial aid fraud this year, state data shows. That’s already much higher than the colleges reported losing all of last year. Most of it is federal aid, in the form of Pell Grants intended for low-income students. 

    Colleges have increased their efforts to detect and deter the fraud through both more human interaction and automated detection. Officials believe they are getting better at doing so, but the increasing losses show that the college system is still vulnerable to scammers, who are often part of sophisticated crime rings, some overseas. 

    Community colleges have long been susceptible to fraud, since they are generally open access and usually don’t deny admission to students who meet basic requirements as the more selective University of California and California State University do. The problem was made worse by the Covid-19 pandemic. The shift to remote instruction “created fertile ground” for fraudsters, said Paul Feist, a spokesperson for the chancellor’s office overseeing California’s community colleges. The scammers wanted to get their hands on the nearly $2 billion in federal stimulus dollars available for emergency student aid available across the colleges. 

    That stimulus aid is now depleted, but the fraudsters aren’t slowing down, according to the data EdSource obtained through a public records request. In 2024, through September, community colleges in California reported disbursing more than $7.6 million in aid that they later wrote off as fraud. The data was provided to EdSource in late October, but the system did not yet have October data available.

    The $7.6 million is up from about $4.4 million that was reported lost all of last year. And that was much larger than the $2.1 million that was reported lost between September 2021 and the end of 2022. September 2021 is when the state chancellor’s office asked colleges to begin reporting monthly about application, enrollment and financial aid fraud. EdSource requested those reports via the state’s Public Records Act. In response, the state shared data on the amount of fraud reported each month but redacted the names of individual colleges. 

    Some officials attribute the latest spike in fraudulent activity to the Department of Education rolling back verification rules for the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), requiring colleges to verify fewer applications. Fraudsters may have seen those changes and sensed an opportunity to get their hands on aid. 

    Pretending to be legitimate students, the fraudsters apply online for admission. Some frauds are caught there, but those who successfully get admitted and enroll in classes can request financial aid, which colleges often distribute to personal bank accounts via direct deposit. 

    Some colleges, as a result, are going back to the old-fashioned method of requiring students to show up in person and prove they are real before they can become eligible for aid. Others, acknowledging the possibility of human error, are also turning to automated methods, including using artificial intelligence to detect suspicious applicants. 

    It is also likely that the colleges are more consistently reporting the fraud. When the chancellor’s office first began asking the colleges to report monthly, there was only “modest participation,” a chancellor’s office official said in a 2022 memo. Now, colleges are reporting at higher rates, though some have still not submitted their reports for months. College officials also believe they have improved at detecting fraud over the past three years.  

    Feist said it can take more than six months from when a scammer applies online for colleges “to detect, investigate and confirm” the fraud. He added that he expects the college system to have better information about the scope of the fraud by the end of this year.

    The scams can have consequences for actual students. With a finite number of seats for each course, real students are often left on waiting lists and unable to enroll in necessary classes because fraudsters are taking up space.

    For the colleges, combating the fraud is a never-ending battle. They have to constantly adapt to the fraudsters, who themselves evolve and come up with new tactics. 

    “This past year, essentially, we would think we’re a step ahead and then the next day we would be a step behind. We were always playing cat-and-mouse,” said Nicole Albo-Lopez, vice chancellor of educational programs for the Los Angeles Community College District. 

    Fraud going up

    In total, colleges since fall 2021 have reported distributing $14.2 million in financial aid that they wrote off as fraud. Federal aid has accounted for the majority of that, but colleges have also distributed more than $3 million in state and local aid to the scammers.  

    Feist noted that is a small percentage — less than 1% — of the total aid the colleges have distributed to students in that time. 

    The fraud initially spiked in 2021, when the colleges had billions of dollars available in emergency financial aid grants for students. Between March 2020 and March 2021, the federal government passed three pandemic relief bills and awarded California’s community colleges $4.4 billion, of which $1.8 billion was allocated for emergency grants. 

    The financial aid office at East Los Angeles College in Monterey Park.

    Distribution of emergency grants ended in 2023, but the fraud did not. Some colleges have reported eye-popping losses of federal aid, leading to the $7.6 million the system has lost so far this year. 

    One college, its name redacted in the data shared with EdSource, reported losing $405,395 in April, $344,296 in July and $119,262 in May. Another college lost $193,286 in April and $76,303 in June. When colleges write off aid distributions as fraud, it’s typically because the recipient stops attending classes altogether after receiving the aid.

    At the same time, dozens of colleges did not report fraud numbers for at least one month this year, raising the possibility that the actual amount of aid lost to fraud is even higher than what has been reported.

    Some officials theorized that the federal government’s relaxed FAFSA verification requirements could be playing a role. Typically, about a quarter of FAFSA applications are selected for verification, which involves the colleges verifying the information a student reports on their application. Under the new rules, colleges are now required to verify a much lower share of FAFSA applications — even lower than during the pandemic, when rules were also relaxed, according to the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators. 

    The changes were implemented to help colleges more quickly process aid applications, particularly after the FAFSA delays that plagued colleges and students last academic year.

    Victor DeVore, the dean of student services at the San Diego Community College District, said it is likely that the relaxed FAFSA verification led to more scams.

    “It’s letting people know that, ‘Oh look, they’re relaxing their verification rules, so now I have a better chance of trying to get some aid fraudulently,’” he said. 

    At the same time, colleges have also been have getting better at identifying the fraud. 

    This year, about 25% of applications have been flagged as possible fraud, up from 20% last year. “Part of the reason is that our systems are becoming more effective at detecting fraud, even as the attempts become more sophisticated,” Feist said.

    ‘Nobody’s trained in this’

    There are three stages of fraud: Application fraud, when scammers try to get admitted to the college; enrollment fraud, when they attempt to get a spot in a class; and financial aid fraud, when they successfully receive aid after enrolling.

    Fraudsters often target classes with no prerequisites, since those are easier to access, said Tina Vasconcellos, vice chancellor of the Peralta Community College District, which is based in Oakland and has four colleges in Alameda County.

    Spencer O’Bosky, a computer science major at Los Angeles Pierce College, tried several times in the spring to enroll in online math classes, only to see them fill up shortly after they opened for registrations. 

    When he eventually was able to enroll in one, some of the other students listed on the course roster didn’t turn in any work and were dropped as suspected scammers. 

    “I always thought I was the only one experiencing this, but then I heard about it happening a lot,” O’Bosky said. “I think it’s terrible. It stops people from being able to sign up for these classes.”

    To keep the fraudsters out, several college officials said they have turned to a simple yet effective tactic. When a student is flagged as suspicious, staff ask them to either come to campus in person or join a video meeting to prove they are a legitimate student. 

    But some still slip through the cracks, especially as scammers get more sophisticated.

    “Nobody’s trained in this. We have humans doing this all over the state, all over every state trying to figure out how to mitigate this issue that nobody’s trained for,” Vasconcellos, the Peralta vice chancellor, said.

    To reduce human error, colleges have looked for ways to automate fraud detection. 

    The state chancellor’s office last year piloted a new ID proofing system, working with the online platform ID.me to verify identities of applicants. Feist said the verification system “has been effective in helping to reduce the amount of fraud and help mitigate local workloads” but added that “bad actors continue to shift their attacks.”

    Some fraudsters now steal identities and submit the stolen but legitimate information — like a real address and real forms of identification — when applying, said Jory Hadsell, the vice chancellor of technology for the Foothill-De Anza Community College District. When the fraudster sets up direct deposit, they only need a bank account and routing number, not a name to match the one on their application. 

    Scammers also changed their approach at the San Diego district after officials there successfully started sniffing them out by detecting that they were using virtual private networks (VPNs), which create a connection between the user’s computer and a network in another location, making it appear like the fraudster is in that location. For example, one student applied with their VPN set to a Los Angeles location, but their IP address showed they were actually in China.

    Rather than VPNs, the fraudsters this past year started using burner phones, which come with a business IP address, said DeVore, adding that it’s harder to determine whether those are legitimate. “They switched up their game,” he said.

    To add another layer of fraud detection, the Foothill-De Anza district is one of two in a trial test with an artificial intelligence platform, Lightleap, to identify potential scammers by analyzing “key data and behavioral elements,” according to a report presented to the state’s board of governors this summer.

    The AI platform, for example, can identify “fraud clusters,” such as when many applications are coming from the same IP address, Hadsell said. 

    Vasconcellos, who wants to similarly use AI at the Peralta district, said she is hopeful it will become a more common fraud detection tool, both at her district and across California.

    “We just need to keep learning and keep trying to get ahead of it,” Vasconcellos added. “They keep changing, and we have to keep changing to address whatever new things, new ways they’re trying to get through.”

    Delilah Brumer, a former member of the EdSource California Student Journalism Corps, contributed reporting.





    Source link

  • Changing careers might mean becoming a student again – and that’s OK

    Changing careers might mean becoming a student again – and that’s OK


    When I decided to enroll in community college, my goal wasn’t to get a degree — I wanted a new job.

    I have my bachelor’s degree in acting and was a professional actor until the pandemic. At 25, I was happy with my life as an actor. My calendar was even booked out for the entire year, performing in theaters across the state of Washington.

    A week before I was laid off from a theater contract, I saw a video of NPR host Korva Coleman reading the hourly headlines. I watched her effortlessly move through the segment as she held her script and pressed play on audio clips, while simultaneously keeping herself to time. It felt like watching live theater for the first time.

    “I wish I could do that,” I thought.

    I never got another acting contract after the pandemic, and all of a sudden, I was 28. My acting resume suddenly looked useless to me and my other resume was just a list of odd jobs I did to support myself as an actor.

    My plan before the pandemic was to move to Los Angeles to further my career. I still made the move even though I let acting go. The only thing I still had in common with my previous life was my commute to work as a waitress — listening to the news. I thought about Korva Coleman operating a radio board. 

    I wasn’t alone in having an existential career change crisis at this time. In 2021, a U.S. Catalyst/CNBC poll said that 50% of employees wanted to make a career change because of the pandemic. I spent my days off looking at job postings for my local NPR affiliate stations that I wasn’t qualified for. I would get frustrated that I couldn’t intern because I wasn’t a student. 

    That’s when I decided to enroll at Pasadena City College. I started last spring with the goal of landing an internship — being a student was just a title to qualify.

    Everything I did during my first semester was strategic. I picked Pasadena Community College because it offered internships directly with LAist (formerly KPCC), a non-profit newsroom. I enrolled only in classes that would give me resume-building skills and certificates. By the end of my first semester, with only a couple completed courses, I networked my way to landing the internship position at LAist.

    This past summer marked the end of my yearlong internship and, through no fault of my own, I do not have a job.

    It still takes all my willpower not to count this as a defeat. 

    I told myself the title of student was just a qualifier for the internship, but I still made sure I got straight A’s. I took on leadership positions at the school newspaper while I was doing my office work for LAist in class. Anytime I wasn’t at school or at my internship, I was working as a server at a restaurant to pay my bills.

    More than 65% of community college students are working more than part-time, according to recent research. And, according to a survey by the RP Group, a nonprofit research center affiliated with the California community colleges, one-third of would-be returning community college students haven’t re-enrolled because they’ve prioritized work. 

    After this year, I wasn’t planning on enrolling back in school for the fall. But then my journalism professor approached me to be editor-in-chief for the campus newspaper, The Courier. I didn’t respond to him for weeks because I was still in the mindset that my return to college was strictly for the career. Being a student doesn’t pay for my rent, gas and food.

    When I was a student in my undergraduate theater program, a professor told me that you should only take an acting job if it meets two of three requirements:

    1. It is a paid job and it pays well,
    2. It offers an opportunity to network and grow as an actor,
    3. And/or it is a dream role.

    In other words, should an opportunity only fulfill one of these requirements, don’t bother with it. However, you should not expect every opportunity in your life to meet all three points. Those are few and far between.

    I thought about her advice a lot when I returned to college at PCC. Taking the role of editor-in-chief barely makes two out of the three requirements — but then I remembered that this list was to help you with taking jobs in your career, not for being a student.

    Being the editor-in-chief this semester has allowed me to push myself to be a better reporter, a stronger editor and a peer to turn to if a student needs help. I get weekly joy from reading work from my classmates who chose to show up simply because they want to learn. 

    For the first time in this academic journey to change careers, I have found myself at peace being a student learning in a classroom. While I’m still anxious about the unknown, I’m allowing myself to appreciate that I made the first step on this long journey towards a new career.

    •••

    Laura Dux is a second-year journalism and radio broadcast major at Pasadena City College and editor-in-chief of the student-run newspaper, The Courier. She is a member of EdSource’s California Student Journalism Corps.

    The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • UC approves hefty tuition increase for non-Californians

    UC approves hefty tuition increase for non-Californians


    UCLA campus in westwood on Nov. 18, 2023.

    Credit: Julie Leopo / EdSource

    This story was updated to note that the full board of regents voted to approve the tuition increase.

    The University of California will increase annual tuition by $3,402 for out-of-state undergraduate students who enter the university next fall, under a plan approved Thursday by the system’s board of regents. That will bring the total cost of tuition for nonresident students to $52,536. 

    Tuition for incoming California residents will not be impacted by the policy, but those students still face separate, inflation-based increases that UC previously approved. Next year’s incoming class of Californians will pay about $500 more in tuition than the 2024-25 cohort, bringing the total to $14,934 before campus fees.

    The supplemental tuition charged to UC’s nonresident undergraduates will go from $34,200 to $37,602 — a 9.9% increase. The supplemental portion is on top of UC’s base tuition charged to in-state students. The total $52,536 price for nonresidents will be frozen for that cohort of incoming students for up to six years. 

    The hike, which was opposed by student leaders, was approved by the full board Thursday. It had cleared the regents’ finance and capital strategies committee on Wednesday.

    Nonresident students in fall 2023 made up 16.6% of UC’s total undergraduate enrollment, or 38,701 students from other states and nations. More than half of those, just under 21,000, are international students. 

    The share of out-of-state students varies greatly across the campuses, with Berkeley, Los Angeles and San Diego campuses enrolling the most. In recent years, however, those three campuses have started to reduce enrollment of nonresident students at the direction of state lawmakers, who have provided UC funding to replace spots for nonresidents with Californians at those campuses. 

    The increase for now is a one-time hike, but UC could raise tuition further for future entering classes when it sets its budget for future years. Short of that, those future cohorts could also still be subject to inflation-based tuition increases, thanks to the plan UC previously approved for annual tuition hikes that apply to both resident and nonresident undergraduates.

    In defending the tuition raise, Nathan Brostrom, UC’s chief financial officer, cited a challenging 2025-26 budget outlook for the university. As part of this year’s state budget agreement, UC was told to prepare for annual budget cuts of 7.95% beginning in 2025-26. “So that was why the timing made sense,” he said.

    UC officials also said UC’s tuition for nonresident students is relatively low compared to peer institutions. At public universities in Virginia and Michigan, out-of-state students pay $7,000 and $11,500 more in nonresident fees than students at UC, according to UC officials.

    “We were quite a bit behind. And so that’s why we looked at whether we had some headroom to raise it,” Brostrom said in an interview.

    Separately, a UC spokesperson said in a statement that the increase will “support core operations” amid anticipated state budget cuts “without raising costs for current students and California residents.”

    The cost of UC’s supplemental nonresident tuition has steadily increased over the years. The regents approved a $762 hike in 2019, and the supplemental portion has been subject to further increases since the 2022-23 academic year as part of the annual tuition increases UC approved in 2021. But the increase approved Thursday represents by far the largest of those hikes.

    The approval of the tuition hike came over the objections of several students, including Eduardo Tapia, who is the university affairs chair for the UC Student Association.

    “Opportunity to higher education should not face any more barriers,” Tapia said during the Wednesday’s public comment period. “Instead of increasing the salaries of UC administrators, let’s make sure college is more affordable for all.”

    Francis Villanueva, an undergraduate student at UCLA, expressed concern that the tuition increase would impact the “most underserved, underprivileged, and marginalized” students across UC.

    “UC claims that the UC system is already cheaper than other institutions across the nation,” Villanueva added during Wednesday’s public comment period. “But in such a crucial time as this one where futures are on the line, how can the UC claim to care about students and making higher education affordable?”

    Brostrom, the UC chief financial officer, said he appreciates the students’ “passion” about the policy, but added that UC’s out-of-state students skew toward higher income brackets. Nonresident students aren’t eligible for Cal Grants, the financial aid awards available to California residents. Domestic out-of-state students can qualify for federal Pell Grants, but international students do not.





    Source link

  • Shortage of teachers and classrooms slows expansion of arts education in Los Angeles and beyond

    Shortage of teachers and classrooms slows expansion of arts education in Los Angeles and beyond


    EdSource file photo courtesy of Oakland School for the Arts

    Raising the curtain on California’s landmark arts education initiative, funded by voter approval of Proposition 28 two years ago, has been a highly complex endeavor marked by a lack of arts educators, classroom space and free time in school schedules, according to a new report.

    These challenges are among the key issues schools must address to make Proposition 28’s ambitious vision of arts education a reality, according to a new report studying the impact of the groundbreaking statewide initiative on schools in the Los Angeles area. Passed by voters in 2022 by a wide margin, the measure sets aside roughly $1 billion a year toward TK-12 arts education programs statewide.

    “Given the historic nature of this investment in arts education, all eyes are on California and our schools, and so we want to make sure that we get it right,” said Ricky Abilez, director of policy and advocacy at Arts for LA, the arts advocacy organization that commissioned the report. “I also know that there are a lot of really tough challenges that schools are facing on the ground.”

    Accountability is among the most critical issues in building trust with families, according to this analysis, which focuses on 10 Los Angeles school districts. The report recommends creating a statewide oversight and advisory committee of administrators, teachers, families and community partners to make sure that arts education funds are properly spent. It also calls for subsidizing teacher credential programs to combat the teacher shortage.

    “We hear these resounding calls for transparency from our community members, but many district arts leaders also share those same interests and concerns,” said Lindsey Kunisaki, the Laura Zucker fellow for policy and research, who wrote the report. “They wanted to make sure that they’re putting their best foot forward with Prop 28 implementation, but they also had questions about their peers and neighboring districts and wanted to make sure that ultimately everyone is doing their best work and using these funds responsibly.”

    The need to build bridges between schools, communities and families is part of what drives that recommendation. Roughly 66% of respondents to the survey were uncertain whether Proposition 28 was being implemented in their school, according to the report.

    “One of the central insights of the report is the link between confidence in Prop 28’s success and public involvement,” said Kunisaki, a research and evaluation specialist at the UCLA School of the Arts and Architecture’s visual and performing arts education program. “Respondents expressed less skepticism when they believed their communities were actively involved.”

    Arts education in schools can help foster a sense of social connection that has frayed in the wake of the pandemic, many experts suggest. The rub is that many community members express passion for arts education (89%) but have not yet gotten involved with their schools for a variety of reasons. Only 20% of respondents have been actively involved. 

    Districts with vibrant arts advisory councils make it easy to participate, Kunisaki notes, but other paths also exist.

    “If it isn’t clear how to get involved,” said Kunisaki, “then even just showing up at a school board meeting, getting to know the school site leaders, principals, that could be a great way to start the conversation.”

    Proposition 28 represents an attempt to bring arts education back into California schools after many decades of budget cuts eliminated many such programs. Before this influx of funding, only 11% of California schools offered comprehensive arts education, research suggests. Wealthier schools were far more likely to be able to fundraise enough to foot the bill for arts education.

    Spearheaded by former Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) Superintendent Austin Beutner, the measure is an attempt to give all students access to the arts, which has long been associated with everything from higher test scores to greater social-emotional learning.

    All the money must go to arts education, but that is very broadly defined. The disciplines include, but are not limited to, dance, media arts, music, theater and such visual arts as folk art, painting, sculpture, photography and animation. Film and video pursuits are also encouraged, from script writing to costume design. Each school community is invited to design the program to meet the needs of its students.

    The report also notes that some districts are falling behind others. While some districts quickly launched new arts ed programs, from music to dance, others are still in the planning phase, according to the report. Districts with preexisting arts councils and strategic arts plans have the upper hand. Proposition 28 funds are allocated based on enrollment, so larger schools get more money. Also, schools with more low-income students receive extra money.

    Uncertainty and confusion about the rules, heightened by a lack of clarity from the California Department of Education (CDE) on spending, have significantly complicated this process, the report suggests. 

    “One of the recommendations that I heard was basically for CDE to take more of a central leadership role,” said Kunisaki, “especially when it comes to oversight and accountability.”

    The long-standing teacher shortage also remains a critical obstacle. In 2022-23, California schools employed about 11,113 full-time arts teachers, primarily teaching music and visual arts. Another new Proposition 28 report, commissioned by the Hewlett Foundation’s Performing Arts Program and conducted by SRI Education, concluded that California must increase the arts teacher workforce by roughly 5,457 teachers to meet the new demand. Many experts estimate a much higher number.

    The need for greater transparency in the rollout of Proposition 28 is another key concern. At the core of Proposition 28 is the rule that funds are designed to supplement, and not supplant, existing funding, which means that you can’t use the new money to pay for old programs. Nevertheless, there have been reports of districts using the funds to pay for existing programs. Amid these allegations, State Superintendent Tony Thurmond issued a letter reminding superintendents of the law’s requirements.

    One potential fix, the study suggests, would be a statewide oversight committee charged with monitoring the rollout and settling disputes on key issues. 

    “There’s a real need for CDE to step in here, to create a more formal advisory and oversight committee, and most importantly, to include practitioners,” said Kunisaki.

    “That’s administrators at the district level, at the school site level, teachers, parents and guardians, families, students and community partners, because we know how important community involvement is.” 

    CDE has provided guidance in FAQs and webinars to help districts navigate the rules. Thurmond has also established a new task force to clarify the issues facing the field. It remains unclear whether the task force will provide the depth of oversight that many experts suggest is needed.

    “The California Department of Education commends the districts represented in this report who have approached Prop 28 implementation with urgency, care, and a commitment to expanding all students’ access to arts education,” said Elizabeth Sanders, spokesperson for the department. “Especially as California’s local educational agencies are still in the beginning of this implementation process, CDE will continue to provide guidance and technical assistance to support effective and robust implementation.”

    Beutner, the former LAUSD Superintendent who authored Proposition 28, is also calling on the department to hold districts accountable for how they spend the money. 

    “CDE needs to provide more leadership on the proper implementation of Prop 28,” said Beutner. “They’re understaffed to handle the implementation of a new law like this, but some of the confusion and misinterpretation that is happening is because CDE hasn’t been on top of this. CDE should be pursuing public enforcement action now against school districts that are alleged to have violated the law.”





    Source link