In 2008, when I served as a deputy superintendent at the California Department of Education, two district superintendents approached me with a simple ask: permission to innovate.
They had a plan to partner on student improvement and needed clarity — not funding or new mandates, just flexibility to act.
They submitted a waiver request, believing state law blocked their approach. Three months later, the department’s legal review found they didn’t need a waiver after all. It turned out they had the authority to do everything they wanted to do.
That sounds like a win, but it’s the opposite. If it takes a team of state experts three months to determine what’s allowed, how are district leaders and classroom teachers supposed to navigate this system in real time?
Since then, California’s Education Code has only grown. It now exceeds 3,000 pages. What was once rigid has become nearly impenetrable, and the weight of that complexity falls squarely on educators and students. When every decision is shaped by compliance, teachers have less space to use their professional judgment or respond to student needs. School leaders spend countless hours managing regulatory requirements instead of building responsive, student-centered programs. We need a system that trusts educators to lead.
This isn’t just an administrative issue. It’s a design flaw. Years and years of well-meaning regulations that may have made sense at the time, many of which I played a role in creating, have created a patchwork of incoherence, too often equating oversight with accountability. As Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson write in their book “Abundance,” government “needs to justify itself not through the rules it follows but through the outcomes it delivers.” Jennifer Pahlka drives the point home in her “Recoding America”: We’ve become better at writing rules than achieving outcomes.
And still, outcomes lag. California has one of the most complex education codes in the country, but that complexity hasn’t translated into better results. Interestingly, the states with the largest education codes aren’t the ones with the strongest student outcomes. Take Massachusetts. It consistently outperforms California on national benchmarks, yet it operates without a formal education code, relying instead on a set of general laws and streamlined regulations.
Meanwhile, California’s code still includes Cold War-era relics like a ban on teaching communism “with the intent to indoctrinate” (§51530) and mandates around toilet paper stock in restrooms (§35292.5) and requirements that school plans include strategies for providing shade (§35294.6). These aren’t metaphors — they’re actual statutes. In trying to regulate everything, we’ve built a system that too often enables nothing.
This isn’t just about outdated rules — it’s about outdated infrastructure and governance. Over the last several decades, as California took on a greater role in funding and overseeing schools, it never fully built the governance system needed to support that shift. Instead of redesigning, we layered. To provide support for districts, we created the California Department of Education (CDE), then county offices, and then the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence (CCEE). Each was created to fill a gap the last one couldn’t. None were really designed to work together. And now, we’re stuck with a 1950s-era structure trying to serve 21st century needs.
There’s a way forward. In the 1990s, while I was working in the Clinton administration, Congress faced a similar problem: Everyone agreed the U.S. had too many outdated military bases, but no member of Congress would vote to close their own. The solution was the Base Realignment and Closure Commission (BRAC) — an independent, time-limited body created by Congress that recommended a package of closures back to Congress for an up-or-down vote. It worked. BRAC cut 21% of domestic bases, streamlined operations and is widely regarded as a major success.
California should create an Education Code Review Commission modeled on the BRAC approach. A diverse group of educators, parents, students, and experts would review the full code, incorporate best practices from research and other states, and recommend a new governance structure and streamlined replacement. The Legislature would retain authority but vote on the whole package rather than amending it piece by piece.
This isn’t about trimming at the margins. It’s a reset. One that gives educators clarity, restores professional trust, and builds a framework for student success. Governance is about choices. In trying to solve every societal problem — many of them important — California’s Education Code has lost sight of its core purpose: helping schools teach and students learn.
This is a call for coherence — not to abandon standards and accountability. Teachers and students deserve a system that encourages bold, thoughtful leadership — and California should deliver.
•••
Rick Miller is a partner with Capitol Impact, a consulting firm that partners with educational institutions, governments and other entities to achieve meaningful impact in the social sector. He served as a deputy state superintendent at the California Department of Education from 2002-2010 and as the press secretary at the U.S. Department of Education from 1993-1998.
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.
The first sentence was updated to correct the year mentioned. It was 2008, not 2015.
Los estudiantes de Las Positas College en Livermore participaron en una huelga en el campus en protesta por las políticas de inmigración de la administración actual.
Families should have truthful conversations with children to help process feelings related to ongoing immigration raids.
Students who are afraid to go outside due to encounters with immigration agents can use remote, free mental health services in California.
During the summer, unstructured routine, social isolation and increased social media use can exacerbate feelings of sadness and fear.
With school out for the summer, some students may no longer have access to crucial support and services available during the academic school year, as fear and anxiety rise in their communities from ongoing immigration raids.
California schools are still safe havens for students attending summer school, meaning federal immigration officers are prohibited from entering them and child care facilities without proper legal authorization. But fears remain unabated for both children of immigrants and their friends, as federal immigration agents in California continue to detain, arrest and deport residents, in what community members say has become an indefinite fixture of the Trump administration.
Research shows that students are six times more likely to access mental health care during the school year than in the summer months, and that the absence of school-based services often leads to worsening mental health for students during the summer.
School social workers are unable to offer routine check-ins and on-campus counseling for students during the summer break, but families can take steps to support their child’s mental health and prepare for what experts are calling a child welfare and human rights crisis.
Talk through your child’s feelings
During the summer, children are much more likely to internalize traumatic events like raids on social media or outside of school, often in isolation and lacking the safe environment of a classroom to talk through their feelings about the day’s news.
To help them feel safe, school counselors and child psychologists recommend that families have truthful, open conversations about sweeps, rather than trying to shield them. Ahmanise Sanati, a school social worker in Los Angeles who works with children from immigrant communities as well as those unhoused, said families should start by asking children: “What have you heard?” and “How are you feeling?” They should then validate their child’s feelings of confusion, anxiety, grief or concern in developmentally appropriate ways, she said.
Both young and older children should understand their family’s risk profile — whether a family member could realistically be detained or deported by ICE, or whether they can be exposed to ICE agents in public spaces, for example. Families should spare younger children graphic or unnecessary details and limit or schedule older children’s social media use, Sanati said. Parents can assure their children that they’ll be OK, but not by telling them, “don’t be afraid” — because fear is a natural reaction.
Sanati says parents should center a child’s feelings, regardless of age, and that when feelings are repressed or minimized, witnessing raids, detentions and deportations, especially in childhood, can exacerbate risks of long-term mental illness.
“Children are already seeing masked individuals with weapons coming into the communities, tackling people and taking them away and putting them into vehicles,” Sanati said. “We have to acknowledge that some very scary things are happening in all of our communities — by lying about the magnitude of this, we may be risking our trust with our children in the future.”
Prepare for emergencies
If a loved one is at risk of being detained or deported, families should prepare and rehearse a step-by-step emergency plan with their child.
Students age 12 and over can role-play scenarios in which they might have to call for legal assistance or help build their legal defense, such as by taking pictures and recording names, badge numbers and descriptions of encounters with immigration agents, if possible. If a family member is detained by ICE, they should ensure other family members, including children, and emergency contacts have a copy of their A-Number, which is assigned to an undocumented person by the Department of Homeland Security, if they have one. Older children and family members should also know how to use the ICE detainee locator to find someone in custody.
“One way to validate a child who is afraid is by letting them know that their family will be ready for a worst-case scenario,” said Marta Melendez, a social worker with LAUSD. “If you don’t feel safe picking up groceries, for example, we have volunteers doing that for families. It’s OK for parents to feel afraid — that should not keep them from seeking support.”
Create a child care plan
Since children are spending more time at home and less time on protected school grounds during the summer, families should also create a child care plan in case a child is left unsupervised due to detention or deportation.
They can arrange for their child to be under the care of another trusted adult, such as a relative, family friend or neighbor, through a verbal agreement. Since this option is an informal arrangement, families should note that the chosen caregiver will not have legal authority to make medical or school-related decisions for their child.
Alternatively, families can have a trusted caregiver complete a Caregiver’s Authorization Affidavit, which would give them legal authority to make medical and school-related decisions on their child’s behalf. The CAA can only be used in California. It does not affect existing custody or parental rights.
Families can also have a state court appoint a guardian for their child, which, unlike a CAA, would grant the new guardian full legal and physical custody of the child. While guardianship does not terminate parental rights, it temporarily suspends them while the guardianship is in place. Families should seek legal counsel before considering this route.
If a child is a U.S. citizen, they should have their passports with them. They should also have important medical documents on file, including a list of medical conditions and medications, when applicable. Importantly, families should walk children through their child care plan and assure them that they will be cared for.
If families are unable to create a child care plan in case of an emergency, or if they become unhoused, they can go to any school that is open during the summer and ask to speak with their Pupil Services and Attendance counselor. Even if a child is not enrolled in summer school or programming, they have a right to stay on campus if there is no other safe location for them to go. PSA counselors can help families find long-term care for their child if necessary.
Families with undocumented or legal status have become increasingly afraid of stepping out — even for doctor’s appointments.
With the risks of seeking in-person care, combined with a lack of on-campus counseling during the summer, students can utilize various remote mental health services and asynchronous resources available for free.
BrightLife Kids, a part of California’s CalHOPE program, provides online behavioral health support through one-on-one coaching with licensed wellness coaches, educational and self-help tools and peer communities. Children age 0 to 12, parents and caregivers can use the program’s remote services to help kids manage worries, express feelings like sadness, anger and frustration, and learn resilience, problem-solving and communication. Coaching services are offered in both English and Spanish. Kids, parents or caregivers do not need to be U.S. citizens, nor do they have to have health insurance. Families can sign up on the BrightLife Kids website here.
Soluna, which is also a part of the CalHOPE program, offers free, confidential mental health support for people 13–25 years old in California. The app allows young Californians to select coaches based on 30 areas of focus, including anxiety, loneliness, substance misuse and demographic preferences such as ethnicity and gender. Users can also join peer support groups in carefully moderated, confidential environments. The app download is available on the Soluna website here.
School-based wellness centers often have year-round mental health intervention and support services available for students. Many offer psychiatric social workers who provide services like trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy and programs for children and families who have experienced adverse events or traumatic stress. A full list of wellness centers in California is available here.
Los Angeles Unified students and families can call 213-241-3840 on weekdays from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. to get access to mental health services. Families can also directly refer their children to in-person or telehealth counseling through a referral form for the School Mental Health Clinics and Wellness Centers.
Practice healthy coping skills as a family
According to Melendez, families can prepare for scenarios like an ICE raid, detention or deportation by preemptively building their and their child’s mental health tool kit, similar to an emergency plan. Research shows that even basic mindfulness interventions can mitigate the short- and long-term negative effects of stress and trauma, and these techniques, when taught bilingually, are especially effective for populations such as the Latino community.
To start, Melendez recommends learning mindfulness practices such as box breathing, butterfly hug, guided meditation and positive affirmation, which are common techniques known to help children regulate their nervous system, cope with symptoms of anxiety or depression and perform better in school. Parents and caregivers should practice these techniques with their child to model calming rituals and build emotional resilience as a family unit, Melendez said.
“You should also prioritize something that is a positive outlet for the child,” Melendez said. “Whether they like to play sports, to write about their feelings, draw about their feelings, sing about their feelings, if they want to dance about their feelings — make sure that they have a way of processing all the emotions that they are experiencing.”
Data indicate a spike in both substance use and feelings of sadness among adolescents during the summer, which worsens in part due to unstructured routine, increased isolation and increased social media use.
To create a sense of normalcy for children, Melendez said families should do their best to maintain healthy routines and hobbies during the summer, especially those that promote social connection with their peers.
At a recent Latino-themed graduation ceremony at California State University, Channel Islands, a student’s cap proclaims that nothing is impossible with family.
Courtesy of CSU Channel Islands
Top Takeaways
California colleges and universities have received more than $600 million in program grants.
Challenger successfully sued Harvard to end affirmative action in admissions.
Five UC campuses, 21 Cal State schools and many California community colleges are Hispanic-Serving Institutions.
Each year, most of California’s public colleges and universities are eligible for extra federal funding for a simple reason: They enroll high numbers of Latino students.
The federal government sets aside millions of dollars in grants annually for colleges classified as Hispanic-Serving Institutions, a designation earned by having an undergraduate student body that is at least 25% Latino. In total, California colleges and universities have received more than $600 million in HSI grants since federal funding for the program began in 1995.
California, with its large Latino population, has the most HSI campuses in the nation — 167,or more than a quarter of the 602 HSIs in the country. That includes five of the University of California’s nine undergraduate campuses, all but one of California State University’s 22 regular campuses and the majority of the state’s community colleges.
But now, California colleges classified as HSIs are facing an uncertain future and could be at risk of losing that designation and funding if a recently filed lawsuit is successful.
The lawsuit was brought in U.S. District Court by the state of Tennessee and Students for Fair Admissions, the same group that successfully sued Harvard to end affirmative action in admissions. It argues the criteria to become an HSI are unconstitutional and discriminatory against other ethnic groups and that all colleges serving low-income students, regardless of racial composition, should be allowed to apply for the grants currently available to HSIs.
Colleges are eligible for the HSI designation if they sustain Hispanic enrollment of at least 25% and at least half of their students are low income. The designation allows them to apply to the competitive grant program. The money is meant to be spent on programs that could benefit all students, not just Latino students, proponents note.
So many California public campuses have the HSI designation in large part because of the state’s demographics: 56% of the K-12 enrollment is Latino.
The legal challenge is distressing to some officials and students who say the HSI grant funding has allowed many California campuses to improve their student support services, such as by offering faculty development as well as adding counseling and student retention programs that benefit Latino students and others.
“A lot of these campuses depend on HSI funds. And with that potentially being stripped, there is going to be a loss of vital infrastructure,” said Cristian Ulisses Reyes, a graduate student at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, where he has been part of an effort to help that campus earn HSI designation by next year.
Supporters of HSIs have been anticipating the possibility of a challenge to the program since President Donald Trump returned to office in January, particularly with the White House’s increased hostility toward diversity, equity and inclusion programs, said Deborah Santiago, the CEO of Excelencia in Education, a nonprofit focused on the success of Latino students in higher education.
“So this lawsuit feels like a culmination of all those fears,” she said.
The lawsuit names the U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon as defendants. It’s not clear to what degree the department will fight the lawsuit. The Department of Education did not return a request for comment.
Edward Blum, a conservative activist and president of Students for Fair Admission, said in an email that the explicit Latino enrollment threshold requirement for HSI designation is, in his view, illegal.
“That means otherwise qualified institutions are denied access to millions in federal support solely because they lack the designated racial mix. That’s racial preference disguised as education policy,” he said.
The lawsuit was filedthis monthin the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, and the plaintiffs argue that allcolleges in Tennessee serving low-income students should be eligible for grants currently available to HSIs.
“Funds should help needy students regardless of their immutable traits, and the denial of those funds harms students of all races. This Court should declare the HSI program’s discriminatory requirements unconstitutional, letting colleges and universities apply regardless of their ability to hit arbitrary ethnic targets,” the lawsuit states.
The lawsuit would create a lot of problems if the case goes against HSIs, but in the immediate future, it doesn’t change anything, said Santiago of the Excelencia in Education group. “There’s still going to be an application, as far as we know, for competitive grants this year, and institutions that have HSI funds are able to continue to use them,” she added.
California State University, Channel Islands, recently held its 2025 Sí Se Pudo Recognition Ceremony, an annual graduation celebration hosted at the campus.Courtesy of CSU Channel Islands
California State University, Channel Islands, has been an HSI since 2010 and now has a student body that is about 60% Latino. Achieving and maintaining the designation has likely helped the campus recruit Latino students over the years, said Jessica Lavariega Monforti, provost of the campus.
“Students are savvy today and they want to know what programs are available to support their success,” she said.
The campus, since 2010, has received $42 million in HSI-related funding, which includes National Science Foundation grants for which HSIs are eligible to apply.
One of the programs created with that funding, called the CSUCI Initiative for Mapping Academic Success, launched campuswide in 2022 and aims to helpstudents who are struggling academically. They are then set up with faculty in weekly workshops to get back on track. So far, according to Lavariega Monforti, retention for students in the program is 7% higher than their peers.
The majority of students who have participated in that program are Latino, but like many initiatives funded by HSI grants, it is not exclusive to Latino and Hispanic students.
The campus has also used HSI funding to train faculty in culturally responsive pedagogy, improve outreach to nearby community colleges to increase transfers, and offer mentorship for students to prepare for their careers after graduation.
“I think what we’re most proud of is that we have been truly student-centered in our approaches,” Lavariega Monforti said. “I hope we get to continue to do this because this is about the ways in which our institution is able to invest back into our community.”
About 150 miles north of the Channel Islands campus, another Cal State campus, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, is in the process of trying to earn its own HSI designation. This past fall, Latino and Hispanic enrollment at the campus hit 25% for the first time. Campuses must maintain that threshold for two years before they can apply for the designation.
If the campus becomes an HSI next year, every CSU campus would have the designation. As of now, the only other campus that is not an HSI is California State University, Maritime Academy, but that is soon to be merged with San Luis Obispo.
Across UC, five of the system’s nine undergraduate campuses are HSIs: Irvine, Merced, Riverside, Santa Barbara and Santa Cruz. Another, Davis, achieved eligibility this past fall by crossing the 25% threshold of Latino enrollment. UC hopes for every campus to eventually have the designation, including UCLA and UC Berkeley.
Reyes, the San Luis Obispo graduate student who also earned his undergraduate degree there, is hopeful that the HSI designation will still exist by the time the campus is eligible to apply. He helped launch the campus’s push for HSI designation while working in the Office of Diversity & Inclusion, including helping to plan a symposium on the effort in 2023.
Reyes is a first-generation college student and said connecting with other Latino staff and students helped him find his way and succeed on the campus.
He first enrolled as a biology major, but was failing classes and on academic probation in his first year. Then he met with a counselor who happened to be Latina and helped inspire him to change his major. He also ended up joining the Lambda Theta Phi Latin Fraternity, a Latino fraternity that he said ended up being the “backbone” of his time on the campus.
Getting the HSI designation and potential federal funding would allow the campus to add more services to help future students, Reyes noted. But after seeing the lawsuit that was filed targeting HSIs, he’s worried the campus might never get to that point.
“It kind of felt like attacks were inevitable to happen, but actually seeing that was frightening and worrisome for me,” he said.
This story was updated June 28 to reflect that Gov. Newsom signed the budget bills.
Top Takeaways
Education remains largely protected despite a weak budget.
Compromise allowed UC and CSU to dodge large proposed cuts.
TK-12 schools see new funding for early literacy, after-school and summer school, and teacher recruitment and retention.
Education will remain mostly shielded from the pain of weak projected state revenues in a 2025-26 budget compromise between Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature. The deal means that public universities, in particular, will dodge bigger cuts proposed by Newsom in January.
TK-12 schools will receive significant one-time funding for new or expanded programs, thanks in part to higher revenue in the current year than the Legislature expected.
The surplus, along with deferrals – an accounting gimmick in which some payments to districts are delayed – will help bridge the gap from a drop in revenue expected in 2025-26. It will enable the state to keep transitional kindergarten on track to fully expand to all 4-year-olds this fall.
Kevin Gordon, president of Capitol Advisors, called it “a remarkable budget in a remarkably bad budget year.”
“There are so many really, really painful cuts being made on the non-school side of the budget,” said Gordon, who lobbies on behalf of hundreds of school districts statewide. “TK-12 does very, very well in comparison.”
How well are schools funded in this budget?
Schools and community colleges are guaranteed a minimum level of funding each year — typically 40% of the state revenues — thanks to Proposition 98, a constitutional amendment voters passed in 1988. Funding for TK-12 schools and community colleges is projected to drop $5 billion from 2024-25 to about $114.6 billion.
The cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) in this budget is 2.3%. The federal formula that determines it feels anemic in a state with such high housing costs.
“A COLA at that level, while relatively normal, will feel like a cut at the local level because fixed costs at a school district rise each year 4.5-5% without making any adjustments — just doing what they did the year before,” said Michael Fine, CEO of FCMAT, the state’s Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team. “That has to be made up locally some other way.”
However, a new, one-time $1.7 billion discretionary block grant should help districts address any shortfalls created by declining enrollments and rising expenses.
How about universities?
The University of California and California State University systems were mostly spared. Neither system faces cuts, but 3% of their base funding will be deferred until 2026-27. That amounts to $129.7 million for UC and $143.8 million for CSU. In the meantime, both systems will be able to access a no-interest loan to cover the difference in 2025-26.
The budget also defers previously promised 5% funding increases for both systems until future years. In 2022, Newsom pledged 5% budget increases for UC and CSU in exchange for the systems working toward a number of goals, including increasing graduation rates and enrolling more California residents. Rather than getting those 5% increases in 2025-26, 2% of the hike will be deferred for both systems until 2026-27 and the remaining 3% will be deferred until 2028-29.
There is also $45 million in new funding for Sonoma State University to help support a plan to turn around the campus, which has been forced to eliminate about two dozen degree programs and discontinue its NCAA Division II sports because of CSU cost reductions.
Who are the winners and losers in this budget?
New initiatives for early literacy and a new mathematics framework are getting a lot of financial support. There’s a robust expansion of after-school and summer programming, as well as support for new teachers. More details about those are below.
One of the biggest losers in this budget is ethnic studies. There’s no funding for the 2021 legislative mandate that was supposed to be offered at high schools this upcoming school year. It was supposed to be a required part of a high school diploma beginning in 2029-30.
This is “extremely disappointing” for advocates of ethnic studies, according to Theresa Montaño, a professor of Chicano Studies at California State University, Northridge, who advocates for ethnic studies through the university level.
Some districts will move ahead with their own ethnic studies requirements, but Montaño is worried that many districts will see it as an excuse to drop it altogether. Montaño said supporters will continue to advocate for legislators to fund ethnic studies, particularly through the professional development of teachers new to the discipline.
Montaño doesn’t know specifically why the initiative was dropped from the budget, but she has heard rumblings that controversies in local districts and the federal government’s push to do away with diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives may have contributed to its demise.
How is the budget balanced?
Accounting maneuvers balanced the budget mostly through a combination of deferrals and one-time funding.
The Prop. 98 rainy day fund will provide $405 million, which will be completely depleted by the end of 2025-26. The budget also defers $1.88 billion of Prop. 98 funds a few weeks after the end of this budget year.
The Legislative Analyst’s Office, which offers nonpartisan fiscal analysis, isn’t a fan of these methods, and criticized them in the Governor’s May Revision. It recommended that the budget avoid deferrals and instead reject some of the new one-time spending proposals. That advice was largely not heeded in this final budget.
Why is this such a tight budget year?
California’s budget is always volatile due to its reliance on the whims of the stock market and the wealthy. We’re not in a recession, but federal tariff increases have created economic uncertainty. Newsom blamed federal economic changes for the shortfall between his January and May proposals.
Devastating fires in Los Angeles have also, to a lesser extent, affected the state’s economy and resulted in increased state spending.
However, the budget also reduces some funding for the system, including cutting $150.5 million for the Common Cloud Data Platform, a project to help colleges share data with one another.
What about financial aid?
The Cal Grant, the state’s main program for financial aid, will get more funding as a result of caseload increases. Funding for the Cal Grant will be $2.8 billion in 2025-26.
What is the state doing to recruit teachers?
Over the past decade, the state has allocated $1.6 billion for strategies to counter the teacher shortage, which seem to be effective. One lingering question has been whether that priority will continue after Newsom leaves office.
Newsom and the Legislature answered with $464 million in the 2025-26 budget — enough to continue three recruitment programs and add a new one, paying candidates seeking teaching credentials $10,000 stipends for student teaching. Unpaid student teaching has been cited as a primary reason teacher candidates fail to complete their credentials. The budget includes:
$300 million in new funding for student teacher stipends
$70 million to extend the Teacher Residency Program
$64 million to extend the Golden State Teacher Grant program, which offers college tuition for those who agree to teach in hard-to-staff subjects or underserved districts
$30 million to extend the National Board Certification program, which offers a professional learning community, pathways to leadership, and tools to deepen teachers’ impact
How is California boosting early literacy?
Newsom this year threw his support behind major legislation to change how children are taught to read, and is jump-starting the process with substantial funding. Advocates wish this had happened a few years ago when the state was swimming in post-Covid funding, but nonetheless are thrilled.
Assembly Bill 1454, which is likely to pass the Legislature this fall, calls for the state to choose evidence-based textbooks and professional development programs that include phonics and strategies of “structured literacy.” The budget will include $200 million for training teachers in transitional kindergarten through grade 5 — enough money to reach about two-thirds of teachers, said Marshall Tuck, CEO of the advocacy nonprofit EdVoice, co-sponsor of the bill. And it will increase funding for hiring and training literacy coaches by $215 million, on top of the $250 million already appropriated.
“Gov. Newsom has made early literacy a state priority in a tight budget year when there are few new expenditures. Investing nearly a half-billion dollars is great for kids,” Tuck said.
What about math?
Math instruction received some new money in the budget, although not of the magnitude of literacy. The $30 million in 2025-26 for professional development will be on top of the $20 million last year for training math coaches and school leaders in the new math frameworks adopted two years ago. County offices of education, working with the UC-backed California Mathematics Project, will lead the effort. An additional $7.5 million will create a new Math Network.
The effort shows potential, but “implementation and rollout will be key,” said Kyndall Brown, executive director of the Mathematics Project. It will take hundreds of millions of dollars to provide for what’s very much needed: a math specialist in every elementary school, he added.
What does the budget include for transitional kindergarten?
The budget includes $2.1 billion to fund the final year of expansion of transitional kindergarten, an extra grade before kindergarten, which will be available to all 4-year-olds beginning in the fall. This includes $1.2 billion ongoing to reduce the ratio in TK classrooms from 1 adult for every 12 children to 1 adult for every 10 children.
How is the budget tackling the state’s child care crisis?
The budget provides $89.3 million to increase rates for subsidies provided to all child care and preschool providers that serve low-income children.
It does not increase the number of children to be served by subsidized child care beyond the current year’s number. The Legislature set a goal to serve 200,000 new children by 2028, compared to 2021-22, but so far has only increased the number of subsidies available by 146,000.
The budget also reduces the Emergency Child Care Bridge Program by $30 million. This program allows foster care families to have immediate access to child care for children placed in their care. The reduction is less drastic than what had been proposed by the governor.
How did after-school and summer programs fare?
More families will be able to take advantage of after-school and summer programs thanks to increases in the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program. These programs both extend the learning day for students and serve as a form of child care for working families.
At the press conference for his May revision, Newsom touted this expansion as a “big damn deal.”
This budget lowers the threshold for school districts to be eligible for this funding. Previously, only school districts where 75% of their students were socioeconomically disadvantaged, English learners or foster youth were eligible. The budget drops that eligibility cutoff to 55%.
Will universal school meals continue?
This budget continues to guarantee two free school meals a day for every child. There is also $160 million in one-time funding for kitchen infrastructure that improves a school’s capacity to serve minimally processed and locally grown food. That funding can also be used for that locally grown food itself. Of that, $10 million is specifically dedicated to nutrition staff recruitment and retention.
Does this budget address any cuts to education by the Trump administration?
But you won’t find any attempt in the state budget to respond to what is happening in Washington. That’s partially a consequence of it being a weak budget year, but it’s also the right thing to do, despite the fact that educators are on edge about potential cuts, according to Gordon, who is a consultant for hundreds of school districts in the state.
“If the state rushed in and paid for everything, it lets [the federal government] off the hook,” he said.
Is there money for schools affected by the Los Angeles wildfires?
The fires affected both school enrollment and taxes, which won’t be paid by those affected until fall. The budget sets aside $9.7 million to backfill taxes. TK-12 schools, including charter schools, that rely on attendance for their state funding will be held harmless for any major dips.
College Advising Corps recruits graduating college seniors to serve as full-time college advisers in high-need high schools nationwide.
Credit: Courtesy of College Advising Corps
Every June, California celebrates a powerful milestone: high school graduation. Students in caps and gowns cross the stage, cheered on by families and communities who see in them hope, pride and possibility.
However, for too many students, especially those from under-resourced schools, the question of what comes next is murky. Some walk off the stage with no clear plan. Others find themselves in programs that don’t align with their goals — or worse, in ones that exploit their hopes without delivering on promised outcomes.
Only 47% of Gen Z say they had enough information to make decisions about life after high school, according to research from Jobs for the Future. That means more than half of today’s graduates are stepping into adulthood without a clear understanding of their options. This isn’t just a failure of information — it’s a failure of connection and support.
And it’s not because young people lack talent or ambition. Too often, we as adults — educators, parents, counselors, mentors and community members — fail to slow down and listen. We’re quick to ask, “What’s next?” but not “What do you want for your future?” or “What support do you need to get there?”
If we want young people to thrive after high school, we need to offer more than a diploma. We need to offer real guidance, grounded in partnership and trust.
Effective advising doesn’t just happen in a counselor’s office. It can take place at the dinner table, on a lunch break, or in a conversation with a trusted adult. Whether you’re a parent talking to your child, a teacher checking in with a student, or a colleague offering advice to a teen in your life, we can all be advisers. And guidance starts with questions, not answers: What are you interested in? What kind of life do you want? What makes you excited about the future? These conversations create space for young people to reflect and be heard.
As adults, we often worry that young people spend too much time on screens and not enough on building real connections. But we’re just as guilty. We answer questions with links, send them to websites, or expect an app to do the listening for us. Meanwhile, we miss chances to engage meaningfully. If we truly want to connect, we have to step away from our own screens, carve out time, and show up with our full attention.
That might mean grabbing coffee, going for a walk, or just asking how a young person is really doing. A meaningful path forward doesn’t start with a form — it starts with a conversation.
We answer questions with links, send them to websites, or expect an app to do the listening for us. Meanwhile, we miss chances to engage meaningfully.
From there, we can help them explore their options — whether that’s a four-year university, community college, trade certification or starting work with a plan for what comes next. Don’t stop at encouragement. Help them complete financial aid forms. Review applications. Connect them with someone in the field they’re curious about. Drive them to a college tour or career fair. Small, consistent gestures often make the biggest difference. You don’t have to have all the answers — you just need to be present and willing to help.
California has made important strides to support students, including new investments in school-based counseling and digital tools for academic and mental health services. These efforts are necessary. But they’re not enough.
The student-to-counselor ratio in California is still more than double the national recommendation. In too many schools, one counselor handles everything from schedules to crisis response to postsecondary advising. That isn’t sustainable if we want students to graduate with a supported path forward.
And while we believe deeply in the power of higher education — a bachelor’s degree remains one of the strongest levers for economic mobility — it’s not the only route to a meaningful life. Students shouldn’t be pressured into one definition of success. They need trusted adults who will walk alongside them, help them weigh options and support them in choosing paths that reflect their goals and strengths.
Before I led a college access organization, I worked in human resources. I hired people with all kinds of backgrounds — elite university grads, community college starters, GED holders, certified technicians. I learned that talent, adaptability and drive don’t always come in the packaging we expect. That experience shaped how I lead today: with a commitment to helping students recognize their potential, no matter their starting point, and supporting them in building futures that make sense for them.
A high school diploma is worth celebrating. But it should come with more than applause. It should come with a map — built in partnership with students and grounded in the belief that every young person deserves a future they can see, shape and own.
Let’s help them build it.
•••
Ekaterina Struett is the CEO of College Advising Corps, a national nonprofit that has helped over 1 million students from low-income, first-generation and underrepresented backgrounds navigate their path to higher education and career success.
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 commentary guidelines and contact us.
About 1 in 3 students in California’s K-12 schools speak a language other than English at home and were not fluent in English when they first started school — 1,918,385 students — according to data from the 2024-25 school year.
About half of these students (1,009,066) are current English learners. The rest (909,319) have learned enough English in the years since they started school to now be considered “fluent English proficient.”
How does a student become designated an English learner?
When a family enrolls a student in school for the first time, they are asked to fill out a survey about the languages the child speaks. If the child speaks a language other than English — even if they also speak English — the school is required to test the child’s English proficiency and decide based on that test whether the child is an English learner.
If the test — the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California, or ELPAC — shows the student to be proficient in reading, writing, speaking and listening in English, they are designated as “Initially Fluent English Proficient” and no longer have to take an English proficiency test again. If the test shows the student is not proficient in English, then they are designated as an English learner. Every spring after that, they must retake the English proficiency test until they are reclassified as “fluent English proficient,” based on this test and how they do on academic tests in English Language Arts, in addition to parents’ and teachers’ perspectives.
How does the population of English learners change over time?
As students advance through elementary and middle school, more of them are reclassified as fluent and English proficient each year, as shown by the illustration below. When students learn enough English to be reclassified as “fluent English proficient,” they are no longer considered English learners. At the same time, new students enroll for the first time in California public schools and are added to the English learner group every year in every grade.
Where are these students from?
The vast majority of English learners were born in the U.S. Among California K-12 students who said they spoke English “less than very well,” 72% were born in the U.S., according to an analysis of the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2016 American Community Survey by the Migration Policy Institute. A higher proportion of English learners in grades 6-12 were born outside the country (45%) compared to grades K-5 (13%).
How many are recent immigrants?
In 2023-24, there were 189,634 recent immigrant students in California who were not born in the U.S. and had not been attending school in the U.S. for more than three full academic years, according to the California Department of Education.
What languages do they speak?
California TK-12 students speak more than 100 different languages other than English. The most common language spoken in California other than English is Spanish — 74.27% of current or former English learners in 2024-25 spoke Spanish, according to the California Department of Education.
The second most common language spoken by current and former English learners in 2024-25 was Mandarin, spoken by 3.57% of these students. The third most common language was Vietnamese, spoken by 2.65%. After that were Cantonese, Arabic, Russian, Korean and Philippine languages, in that order.
How long does it take for students to learn English?
Research shows it normally takes students between four and seven years to learn academic English proficiently.
Only 7.6% of 2024-25 first graders who started school as English learners had been reclassified as “fluent English proficient” in the short time they had been in school. The percentage increases in every grade — among sixth graders who started school as English learners, for example, 45.4% had been reclassified; among eighth graders who started school as English learners, 62.3% had been reclassified; among 12th graders, 73.2% had been reclassified. It’s important to note that the total number of English learners also includes students who started school in later grades and have been enrolled for less time.
Where do they go to school?
There are English learners and former English learners in almost every school district in California, but the percentage varies widely. For example, 85.7% of students in Calexico Unified School District in Imperial County near the border with Mexico, started school as English learners, but only 4.3% of students in Dehesa School District in San Diego County were ever English learners.
How can you tell how well a school is serving its English learners?
The English Language Progress Indicator measures English learner progress by showing how many English learners progressed at least one level on the ELPAC, maintained the same level as the previous year, or decreased one or more levels. You can look up your school’s progress on the California School Dashboard.
Another measure is the reclassification rate — the number and percentage of English learner students who reclassify each year. However, the California Department of Education has not published this rate since 2020-21.
You can also measure a school district’s English learner progress by looking at the number of students who are “long-term English learners” and “at-risk of becoming long-term English learners.” Long-Term English Learners, or LTELs, are students in 6-12th grade who have been enrolled in a U.S. school for at least six years but have remained at the same English language proficiency level on the ELPAC for two or more consecutive years or regressed to a lower English language proficiency level. Students “at risk of becoming Long-Term English Learners” are in third-12th grade, have been enrolled in U.S. schools for four to five years and scored at the intermediate level or below on the ELPAC.
Are academic test scores good measures of English learners’ performance?
By definition, students who are designated as English learners are not yet proficient in academic English reading and writing, so it makes sense that they would not do well on academic tests in English. In fact, in many districts, students must do well on those tests, in addition to the English proficiency test, in order to be reclassified as “fluent English proficient.” When students do become proficient in English and are reclassified, they are no longer included in the English learner category. These students tend to do better on tests than students who speak only English at home.
What do other measures like graduation rates tell us about English learners?
Graduation rates tend to be low for English learners, as are other college and career preparation measures, such as how many A-G courses students have completed. (These courses are required for enrollment in the University of California and California State University systems.) However, it is important to keep in mind that the California Department of Education only publishes these measures for current English learners in high school, many of whom are recent immigrants. The department does not publish these measures for students who were once English learners and have since reclassified.
A selection of books featuring LGBTQ characters that are part of the Supreme Court case.
Credit: AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File
California school leaders will face a new reality when students return next month following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision Friday that parents have a constitutional right to remove their children from classes that conflict with their religious beliefs.
The court’s 6-3 decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor, written by Justice Samuel Alito, gives parents wide latitude in what they can claim conflicts with their religion. It goes far beyond books about gay marriage and gender identity at the heart of the case, which grew out of a dispute involving a Maryland school district, said Edwin Chemerinsky, the dean of UC Berkeley’s Law School, in an interview Monday.
Conservative parental activists vow to move quickly to take advantage of the decision.
In a statement, Jonathan Keller, the president of the California Family Council, called the majority decision “a direct rebuke to the kind of LGBTQ-centered curriculum that has flooded California public schools in recent years. This is our Red Sea moment. God just parted the legal waters. Now it’s up to parents to walk through.”
Districts will have to scramble to design curriculum notification and opt-out protocols, said Troy Flint, a spokesperson for the California School Boards Association.
“This could be a Pandora’s box,” he said. “Right now, there’s a lot of urgency in the membership, with school really only a little more than a month away.”
The high court’s ruling gave districts no leeway if parents interpreted that classroom content conflicted with their religious beliefs.
“A government burdens the religious exercise of parents when it requires them to submit their children to instruction that poses ‘a very real threat of undermining’ the religious beliefs and practices that the parents wish to instill,” Alito wrote.
Given questions that the court’s conservatives asked during oral arguments in April, Chemerinsky said there was little doubt about the outcome of the case, which involved the Montgomery County Public Schools in Rockville, Maryland, a suburb near Washington, D.C.
What is surprising, he said, is that the court’s decision “didn’t have any limiting principle.”
“Any time a parent has a religious objection to a child being exposed to material, the parent has to have notice and the opportunity to opt out,” Chemerinsky said. He said he thought the court might have found some way to limit the ruling’s impact, “because otherwise it’s going to lead to chaos.”
A parent, he said, could object to the teaching of Darwin’s theory of evolution in biology class on religious grounds, citing the Book of Genesis. Or they may opt their child out of an English class if a teacher assigns a book with a witch in it, like “The Wizard of Oz” or “Harry Potter.”
“Keep in mind how incredibly diverse our country is on the basis of religion,” Chemerinsky said. “There’s a church of Satan.”
The decision made clear that the court is not limiting what may be taught. But some advocates for LGBTQ+ students are predicting that the result will be a retreat from controversial discussions and books.
“The ruling sets a dangerous precedent that leads to a slippery slope of what curriculum or instructional materials can be opted out of and calls into question what can be introduced to our classrooms in the first place,” Tony Hoang, executive director of the civil rights group Equality California, said in a statement.
Decisions will be made under pressure, Flint said.
“It’s challenging to make this change on a short turnaround during the summer,” Flint said. “But we’re going to do our best to provide information to members and support them. I expect this will bleed over into at least the first part of the school year, if not longer.”
Changes would likely include “ensuring parents get some kind of advanced notice about curriculum components that touch on controversial topics, gender identity and sexuality being a couple of those,” he said. “There’s not a lot of time.”
Sonja Shaw, president of the Chino Valley Unified School District’s board and a candidate in next year’s race for state superintendent of public instruction, told EdSource that the best way to prevent the havoc of parents opting their children out of classes “is to stop teaching gender, ideology and all that other confusion. Boys are boys. Girls are girls.”
Chino Valley has lost in court on policies Shaw pushed to require parental notification when a student identifies as a different gender. She has claimed that state leaders support policies that “pervert children.”
State Attorney General Rob Bonta, who brought lawsuits against Chino Valley and who filed a friend of the court brief siding with the Montgomery County School District before the U.S. Supreme Court, said in a statement that California must “affirm and protect the rights of all students, including our most vulnerable individuals. By ensuring our curriculum reflects the full diversity of our student population, we foster an environment where every student feels seen, supported, and empowered to succeed.”
“In California, we will continue to remain a beacon of inclusivity, diversity, and belonging,” he said.
The office of state schools Superintendent Tony Thurmond did not respond to a request for comment.
Anne Hubbard, superintendent of the three-school, 900-student Hope Elementary School District in Santa Barbara County, said she has a tentative plan for how opt-outs could work while she awaits legal guidance on the issue.
Parents will fill out an opt-out sheet at the beginning of the year if they prefer their child to participate in an alternative activity instead of being in a class where LGBTQ+ issues are being discussed. They’ll go to another classroom, an office or the library, she said.
But she is not going to stop teachers from using books that involve LGBTQ+ people. “I’m going to be telling the teachers they can read whatever books they want,” she said. “They can have what they want in their classroom libraries.”
David Goldberg, president of the California Teachers Association, said that “teachers are going to continue to really focus on making sure that our curriculum makes every student feel safe and nurtured in our schools.”
“That’s how kids learn. You can’t learn when you feel like you’re not in a safe place,” he said. “Continuing to push people to the margins — that’s not what we do in a democracy or in a pluralistic society that is committed to having every student feel safe and welcomed.”
However, there is also fear that the ruling could lead to schools banning books or changing curriculum, he added.
Shaw said she intends to campaign on the issue as next year’s election inches closer and will push back on advocates and teachers who continue to use lessons that include LGBTQ+ materials and literature.
A teacher kicks off a lesson during an AP research class.
Credit: Allison Shelley / EDUimages
As a former teacher and principal, and a current school board member, I am intimately familiar with the impact of the teacher shortage and consider it one of California’s most pressing and intractable problems. To address this multifaceted issue, schools need a wide array of options, including Assembly Bill 1224, pending state legislation that would increase continuity of instruction when teachers are out on leave and when a school struggles to fill a teacher vacancy.
Authored by Assemblymember Avelino Valencia and co-sponsored by the California Schools Boards Association, the Association of California School Administrators, the California County Superintendents, and the California Association of School Business Officials, AB 1224 would allow substitute teachers to serve in a single classroom for up to 60 days, provided the school district or county office of education can demonstrate it made reasonable efforts to recruit a full-time teacher before retaining the substitute. Until every classroom has a qualified full-time teacher, let’s at least make sure every classroom has a consistent one.
When the Covid-19 pandemic exacerbated already dire teacher shortages, the state temporarily expanded the 30-day limit on substitute teaching to 60 days, a measure that was effective in responding to vacancies and extended absences. That statute expired in July 2024, but with upcoming Senate Education Committee amendments, AB 1224 would revive its provisions for another three years. Using the lessons learned from the successful trial run, the bill would extend the time a substitute can stay in a single assignment from 30 to 60 days in general education and from 20 to 60 days in special education.
In a perfect world, every classroom would have a fully certificated teacher on the first day of class, the last day of class and every day between. As a lifelong educator, I know the value of having a full-time teacher share their learning and wisdom with students on a consistent basis. But there simply aren’t enough full-time teachers to go around. So, we must make policy and governance decisions that reflect the current reality while simultaneously working to build a better system that sets substitutes and students up for success.
Local educational agencies rely on substitutes, but current law forbids a substitute teacher from serving in the same classroom for more than 30 consecutive days. In cases where a school district or county office of education cannot identify a full-time teacher, such as a mid-year departure or one that occurs before the start of the school year, this can lead to a revolving door of substitute teachers that disrupts instruction and destabilizes the classroom environment. These impacts are felt most acutely in low-income and rural schools, and the burden falls disproportionately on English learners, minority students and students from families of modest means. Without AB 1224, students already cycle through different substitutes every few weeks, so the real debate isn’t about lowering standards, it’s about increasing stability.
An insufficient pipeline of newly credentialed teachers and attrition from the profession means that the teacher shortage will persist. Thus, staffing schools — particularly in hard-to-fill areas like special education, math and science — will remain a daunting task. AB 1224 responds to that challenge by adding another tool to the toolbox that schools can use to fill gaps in their instructional workforce.
Critics of AB 1224 claim it would diminish the push to recruit credentialed educators. Real world evidence shows the opposite. Examples abound of LEAs raising salaries, implementing incentive pay, offering signing bonuses, expanding mentorship programs, deploying advertising campaigns, hosting virtual and in-person job fairs, building staff housing for educators, and developing internal pipelines through teacher academies or programs for classified staff who want to transition to the teaching profession. Additional guardrails to preserve the primacy of full-time teachers include collective bargaining agreements governing the hiring process and a bill provision requiring that schools document their efforts to recruit full-time teachers.
It’s disingenuous to suggest extending substitute assignments would undermine the search for long-term solutions to the teacher crisis. It’s also poor logic based on a false binary and an idealized labor market that doesn’t actually exist. This is not a choice between AB 1224 or full-time teacher recruitment; we can and must pursue both remedies. New federal and state programs targeting the teacher shortage are promising but take years, if not generations, to bear fruit when immediate relief is essential. Waiting for long-term pipelines to mature does nothing for students in classrooms today — AB 1224 provides the immediate help schools need to increase stability in the classroom.
•••
Bettye Lusk is president of the California School Boards Association. Lusk is a former teacher and principal in the Monterey Peninsula Unified School District, where she currently serves on the Board of Education.
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.
About 18,000 Chinese students are enrolled at the University of California, 2,600 at California community colleges and 850 at California State University.
Chinese students have increasingly chosen colleges outside the U.S., including closer to home in Hong Kong and Singapore.
Like all international students, Chinese students can be a valuable source of tuition for public universities, since they pay more than California residents.
A flurry of at-times contradictory White House pronouncements are stoking confusion and concern among the 50,000 Chinese nationals who are studyingat California’s colleges and universities — and potentially steering students away from further work and study in the U.S.
Recent shifts in U.S. policy toward China have cast a “cloud of suspicion” over Chinese students, said Gisela Perez Kusakawa, the executive director of the Asian American Scholar Forum, an advocacy group.
“Let’s say you invested all this time, money and energy and years of your life studying to get into a prominent university here in the U.S.,” she said. “You get in, [but] now it’s no longer guaranteed that you could actually finish that degree.”
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a two-sentence statement on May 28 that the U.S. would “aggressively revoke visas for Chinese students, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields.” He also pledged to “enhance scrutiny” of future visa applications from China and Hong Kong.
But the proposal for stronger visa enforcement appears to have been short-lived. On June 11, President Donald Trump announced that the U.S. would allow Chinese students into colleges and universities as part of a trade truce with China.
The flip from crackdown to rapprochement is one of the latest flash points in a volatile period for Chinese students. Even before Trump’s second term, fewer Chinese students were coming to American universities, data show. International students on U.S. college campuses have experienced a tumultuous spring term as the Trump administration first terminated and later said it would restore thousands of international students’ records in a federal database. The State Department in May paused new student visa interviews but said Wednesday it would resume processing and require applicants to make social media accounts public for government review.
V., a Chinese national student at UC Davis, who requested that EdSource withhold his full name in light of uncertain U.S. immigration policy, said the reelection of Trump has made him “a little bit afraid of speaking out.”
“I’m more conscious about, if I speak online or on social media, maybe I’ll get deported,” he said, even though he generally avoids posting anything political online.
Though he hopes to continue working in the U.S. when he graduates this summer, V. knows several Chinese students who also attended American colleges as undergraduates and initially intended to pursue graduate degrees in the U.S., but are now continuing their education in other foreign countries instead.
The ebb and flow of Chinese students is of particular interest to higher education institutions in California. China accounts for 36% of all international enrollment in the state, according to the Institute of International Education, making it California’s single-largest country of origin for international students. Nearly 18,000 Chinese international studentsare enrolled at the University of California, almost 6,000 at the University of Southern California, about 2,600 across the state’s community colleges and roughly 850 at California State University.
Those students bring with them coveted tuition dollars, a boon to the state’s public universities, where international students pay a premium over the rate charged to California residents.
California universities responded to the Trump administration’s statements on Chinese student visas with expressions of support for international students from China. A written statement from the UC system on June 11 said the public university system “is concerned about the U.S. State Department’s announcement to revoke visas of Chinese students.” The statement said international students and scholars are “vital members of our university community and contribute greatly to our research, teaching, patient care and public service mission.”
If Chinese students were to stop attending U.S. colleges and universities, their absence would be felt across academic disciplines. More than a fifth of Chinese students in the U.S. studied math and computer science, roughly 17% pursued engineering and almost 13% sought degrees in business and management, according to 2023-24 data from the Institute of International Education.
Chinese students are most heavily enrolled in U.S. graduate programs. Roughly 123,000 Chinese nationals studying at U.S. colleges and universities — about 44% of all Chinese students in the U.S. — are graduate students.
Sources interviewed for this story emphasized that Chinese students are weighing not only the immediate twists and turns of U.S. foreign policy, but longer-term concerns about cost of living and the draw of preferable options closer to home. They also noted that restrictions on Chinese students are consistent with policies Trump pursued during his first term.
‘Our parents are super, super worried’
A Chinese international student at the University of Southern California who graduated from a Ph.D. program in May said he has become accustomed to exchanging concerned text messages with friends whenever news of possible changes to U.S. immigration policy breaks. EdSource agreed to withhold his full name due to his concerns about increased scrutiny on international students.
“I’ve gotten texts from people saying, ‘Oh, are you OK? Are you safe?’ I’ve got people checking on each other, asking them, ‘So what can happen to the current visa holders? And if I already scheduled [a visa interview], will I still be able to go?’” he said.
Already, he added, peers in China are contemplating pursuing their degrees in the United Kingdom or Australia as alternatives to the U.S. The student himself is applying for Optional Practical Training, which allows eligible international students to extend their time in the U.S. after completing an academic program.
Meanwhile, at UC Davis, V. has found something like a second home. He has joined a sports team, pledged a fraternity and played an instrument in a school-affiliated band. Contrary to the stereotypes of U.S. cities as plagued by gun violence and crime that are common in Chinese media, he has found Davis to be peaceful, diverse and open-hearted.
But with the latest vacillations in U.S. immigration policy, concern is growing at home among Chinese students’ families. “Our parents are super, super worried,” he said, something evident whenever he checks a group chat where the parents of Chinese students in the U.S. share their questions and concerns.
A gradual slide in Chinese students at U.S. colleges
There are ample signs that Chinese students have been cooling on American degrees long before Trump’s return to office this year.
Data from the Institute of International Education show that the number of Chinese students in the U.S. increased rapidly during the 2000s, a trend that continued at a slower pace through the early years of the first Trump administration.
But the number of Chinese internationals at U.S. institutions began to drop with the onset of Covid-19 and has continued to fall since. As of the 2023-24 school year, there were more than 277,000 Chinese students in the U.S., down more than 95,000 students from pre-pandemic levels in 2019-20.
Several expertsinterviewed for this story framed the Trump administration’s recent statements about Chinese students as the latest of several policy changes that may discourage Chinese students from attending college in the U.S.
After Trump left office in 2021, Biden administration Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken struck a more conciliatory tone regarding Chinese students in the U.S., saying in a May 2022 speech that the U.S. “can stay vigilant about our national security without closing our doors.” And during a November 2023 meeting, former President Joe Biden and Chinese leader Xi Jinping expressed a commitment to more educational exchanges.
But the Biden administration initially continued a Department of Justice (DOJ) initiative launched under Trump in 2018, which targeted Chinese researchers accused of stealing American intellectual property. The Biden DOJ ended the program in 2022 following concerns about racial profiling.
And in March 2024, before Trump’s return to office, reports surfaced that more than a dozen Chinese students were denied reentry into the U.S. despite holding a valid visa, while others reported being searched and questioned for hours at the U.S. border. The State Department told The Washington Post at the time that the number of Chinese students found to be inadmissible for entry had been stable in recent years.
‘We are still hoping it’s getting better’
Geopolitical concerns are not the only reasons some Chinese students may think twice about studying at U.S. colleges and universities.
Al Wang, the general manager of Wiseway Global, which recruits Chinese students to study in other countries, said that Chinese students may not apply tocertain U.S. institutions because rankings of the best universities in the world tend to score institutions in countries like the United Kingdom and Singapore above U.S. rivals. In addition, he said, Chinese students may choose to stay home for college, seeing joint-degree programs in China with U.S. universities like Duke as a more economical option.
Wang nonetheless anticipates that the U.S. and China will continue cooperating on education and cultural exchange programs, something the Chinese Ministry of Education has encouraged. He predicted that more Chinese students will study abroad in the U.S. for a school term or summer intensive, rather than enrolling in degree programs. “We are still hoping it’s getting better, but we don’t know where it’s going,” he said.
The Chinese international student at USC suggested that U.S. universities aiming to maintain their international student population should focus on providing legal support, security and a sense of belonging. Failing that, he added, it won’t take long for current students to warn would-be classmates.
“They’re going to tell their peers from high school, or they’re going to tell people from home, ‘Oh, don’t come,’” he said.
Despite statewide efforts, California is still struggling to support the personal and educational needs of its students, according to the 2024 California Children’s Report Card conducted by the organization Children Now, which “grades the State on its ability to support better outcomes for kids” and evaluates progress made on California policies and investments.
“California has failed to significantly improve outcomes for kids, allowing unacceptable and economic disparities to stagnate and in many cases grow,” Ted Lempert, Children Now’s president, wrote in a letter included in the report.
“What’s particularly disturbing is that California continues to trail far behind other states on a number of important indicators of child well-being. Despite our relatively high tax burden, our progressive leanings, and our enviable 5th largest economy in the world, California is far from a leader when it comes to kids. That’s not only a threat to our state’s collective future, but to the entire country as well since California is so often a bellwether for the nation.”
Children’s health
Among the health categories assessed, “health insurance” received the highest grade, A-minus. Meanwhile, “birthing health,” “preventative screenings,” “supporting mental health,” “preventing substance abuse” and “health care access and accountability, all received grades in the D range.
The rest of the health categories — including “environmental health and justice,” “oral health care” and “relationships and sexual health” — all received grades in the C range.
Additionally, the report noted that “while many states and municipalities across the country have declared racism as a public health crisis, California has yet to do so.”
According to the report, “children’s poor health outcomes are largely driven by racism at the intersection of poverty, sexual orientation, gender, and geography.”
Children’s education
Of the 12 topics under education, none earned a grade in the A range. Here’s how the report assessed the state on its education:
C-minus for child care.
B-plus for preschool and transitional kindergarten.
B-minus for early care and education workforce.
D for early intervention and special education.
C-minus for education for dual language and English learners.
C-plus for funding.
B for expanded learning programs
D for science, technology, engineering and math education.
C for educator pipeline, retention and diversity.
D for school climate: connections with adults on campus.
C for “school climate: discipline and attendance.
B-minus for higher education.
“California is investing record amounts in public education, yet struggles to effectively support students, especially those who need the most help,” the report reads.
It added that the state’s education system “ranks 43rd of 50 states of outcome gaps by race and ethnicity.”
Support from family
In terms of family support, “voluntary evidence-based home visiting” earned a C-minus, while in “paid family leave,” the state received a B-minus. “Income assistance for low-income families” was given a B.
“Children’s well-being is fueled by good health, enriching learning opportunities, and positive and nurturing relationships with adults. Both adult and child well-being can be undermined by unmet basic needs, economic hardship, social isolation, and stress,” according to the report.
“Throughout the pandemic, California made positive policy changes to bolster families with key supports, even as federal funding withered away,” the report read. “However, too often, families with young children are an afterthought in California policy.”
Child welfare in California
None of the child welfare categories garnered an A or B.
Instead, the state earned a C for “home stability and enduring relationships” and a C-plus in “health care for kids in foster care.”
Meanwhile, the state earned a D in both education supports for students in foster care and transitions to adulthood.
“For children and youth who cannot remain safely at home and must enter foster care, the State must ensure access to stable and nurturing foster homes, trauma-informed services, and targeted, high-quality educational supports to help them heal and thrive,” the report states.
Cross-sector issues facing California children
In terms of “cross-sector” issues, both “food security” and “cradle-to-career data systems” received a B-minus, while support for LGBTQ+ youth received a C-plus, “decriminalization of youth” received a D-plus and support for unaccompanied homeless youth landed a D-minus.
“While all of the issues in the “Report Card” are interrelated, the topics in this section have especially strong implications across multiple sectors and systems,” the report read.
“A whole-child approach to supporting kids incorporates services that meet young people where they’re at and address the many factors that are needed to help them thrive.”
