برچسب: and

  • New Stanford database tracks learning loss, gain in California and districts nationwide

    New Stanford database tracks learning loss, gain in California and districts nationwide


    A student writes math problems in a fourth grade classroom at William Jefferson Clinton Elementary in Compton on Feb. 6, 2025.

    Credit: AP Photo/Eric Thayer

    A unique database that enables people to compare standardized test scores among nearly all districts and states found that California experienced slightly less learning loss than the national average in the four years following the 2020 pandemic.

    The Education Recovery Scorecard, which researchers from Stanford University, Harvard University and Dartmouth College developed, also identified those districts that have escalated learning recovery and those that had fallen farthest behind. 

    Those whose test scores improved in either math, reading or both, include Compton Unified and Monterey Peninsula, both with high proportions of low-income students, as well as Chino Valley Unified and Bonita Unified, whose students gained nearly a half-grade level of learning compared with pre-pandemic 2019.

    The Associated Press, in conjunction with the researchers, published Tuesday a wealth of information from 43 states with 8,718 districts for which data was available, including the nearly 1,000 districts in California. They affirm what other analyses of states and the nation have found: The decline in scores in both reading and math, as a result of the pandemic, was severe.

    Although no state reached their pre-pandemic scores in both math and reading, many individual districts did. The scorecard found that 31% of California students attended districts scoring above 2019 levels in math, with 12% of students in districts scoring above 2019 levels in reading, and 10% in districts that have recovered in both.

    That’s significantly higher than the national average: Only 17% of students nationally in grades three to eight are in districts whose average math score on the scorecard was above that of 2019.

    However, keep in mind that California had much more ground to make up. In 2019, California’s average score in math was already half a grade behind the national average. While in 2024, the gap between California and the nation had narrowed to 36% in math, scores nationally and in California both had lost ground. As a result, California’s 2019 score in math was 82% of a year of learning below the 2019 national average.

    Some of the biggest districts, including San Bernardino City, Long Beach and San Juan remain more than half a grade equivalent behind in math from five years before.

    Reading scores followed a similar trend. In 2019, the gap between the nation and California was 29%; in 2024, it had narrowed to 22%, yet had dropped to 69% of a grade below the 2019 national average.

    As the state’s two largest districts with nearly 10% of California’s enrollment, Los Angeles and San Diego may have lifted the state’s overall average. Los Angeles in 2024 was within a few percentage points of its 2019 scores in reading and math; San Diego’s pandemic decline was significantly less than the state’s.

    The scorecard makes comparisons possible on a single scale based on percentages of an expected year of growth. It equalizes states’ scores by aligning them to their results on the National Assessment of Academic Progress (NAEP), the common test that a representative sample of students in all states take every two years.

    Going Deeper

    The Associated Press analyzed data from the Education Recovery Scorecard, produced by Harvard’s Tom Kane and Stanford’s Sean Reardon, which uses state test score data to compare districts across states and regions on post-pandemic learning recovery. The AP provided data analysis and reporting for this story.

    Researchers from Stanford, Harvard and Dartmouth created the Education Recovery Scorecard using a longitudinal database developed by the Stanford Graduate School of Education. Because states use different tests with different measures for determining what constitutes proficiency, apples-to-apples comparisons of learning losses and gains across the nation normally can’t be made. Some states’ scores for proficiency are “easier” to achieve than in other states.

    The scorecard affirmed trends that others have found by analyzing NAEP and California’s Smarter Balanced scores and results nationally. 

    • Achievement gaps by income and race and ethnicity widened during the pandemic. The highest-income districts were nearly four times more likely to recover in both reading and math than the lowest-income districts. The disparity in math scores between students in affluent and low-income districts grew by 11% since the start of the pandemic; the disparity in scores between students in predominantly non-minority and predominantly minority districts grew by 15%.
    • High rates of absenteeism, especially in high poverty districts, have slowed recovery. One of the report’s recommendations is to recruit mayors, employers and other community leaders; total responsibility shouldn’t rest with schools, the report said. Help could include launching public information campaigns, funding extracurricular activities to draw students to school; and assisting with transportation, the report said.
    • Federal Covid relief for schools, especially $122 billion from the American Rescue Plan passed in 2021, appeared to stem even bigger learning losses in the higher poverty districts — by about 10% of a grade equivalent. But how districts spent the money mattered. In examining federal spending in California, which required more extensive reporting on expenditures, researchers found that spending on intensive tutoring and after-school and summer school programs tended to yield the most effective results. 

    “The slide in average NAEP scores masks a pernicious inequality: Scores have declined far more in America’s middle- and low-income communities than in its wealthy ones. The good news is that it could have been worse: The federal investment in public schools during the pandemic paid off, limiting academic losses in high-poverty districts,” professor Sean Reardon, faculty director of the Educational Opportunity Project at Stanford and a lead researcher on the scorecard, told the AP.

    Along with Compton Unified, whose impressive improvement started before Covid and was undeterred by it, Bonita Unified, a 10,000-student district where 36% of students are eligible for free or reduced meals, raised both reading and math scores to a third of a grade level above 2019 results. In a letter to parents, Bonita Superintendent Matt Wien praised “the sense of purpose that is felt throughout the district and drives our students and employees alike.” He also pointed to hiring elementary school intervention teachers and comprehensive instruction during summer programs.

    Chino Valley Unified scores rose in 2024 to 43% of a grade above 2019 in math and 34% in reading. Deputy Superintendent Grace Park cited the collaboration of teacher teams that developed an essential set of learning standards in every grade, followed by designing lessons and assessments, then monitoring their effectiveness. She also noted that the district was the first in San Bernardino County to return to the classroom when the pandemic eased.

    Economist Tom Kane, faculty director of the Center for Education Policy Research at Harvard and a collaborator on the scorecard, said it is essential for districts to apply lessons of the recovery. He and Reardon stressed focusing on which of the “science of reading” reforms that districts have tried most improved early literacy.

    “The rescue phase is over. The federal relief dollars are gone. It is time to pivot from short-term recovery to longer-term challenges such as reducing absenteeism and addressing the slide in literacy,” Kane said.

    One advantage California has is a $6.8 billion pot of state money that is replacing the expired federal Covid funds. Distributed based on districts’ low-income enrollment, districts can use the Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant through 2027-28 on tutoring and other research-proven strategies, along with mental health and student well-being. The funding is a second chance.





    Source link

  • What parents and students need to know about LAUSD’s cellphone ban

    What parents and students need to know about LAUSD’s cellphone ban


    Credit: Pexels

    The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) voted 5-2 to develop its new cellphone ban last August — placing the district more than a year ahead of the state’s requirement for districts to limit the use of smartphones by July 1, 2026.  Students should expect to have their cellphones off and tucked away starting on Tuesday. 

    District officials hope that keeping students away from their phones will both boost academic performance and support their mental health. 

    “Kids no longer have the opportunity to just be kids,” said school board member Nick Melvoin, who authored the initial resolution, in a statement released by the district. “I’m hoping this resolution will help students not only focus in class, but also give them a chance to interact and engage more with each other — and just be kids.” 

    Here’s what parents and students need to know about what lies ahead. 

    Where will students’ phones be kept?

    It depends on how each campus plans to implement the district policy. 

    In some schools or classrooms, students might simply have to turn off their phones and put them into their backpacks. In other schools, students will have to place their phones into a storage unit, including pouches that are sealed magnetically. 

    Are there any exceptions to the rule?

    Yes, students who need access to their phones for health-based reasons — or because they have an individualized education program or 504 plan — will be able to hold on to their devices. Students who need help with language translation will also be excused from the policy, along with students who have any other local needs. 

    What about cases where there is an emergency? 

    Whether students can access their devices during emergencies has been one of the larger concerns of parents and other community members.

    In short, if there is an emergency, students will be granted access to their devices if staff members decide it is safe for them to have them. 

    But, if a student asks to use their cellphone because they believe there is a potential threat, they won’t immediately be able to do so. Instead, the school will have to complete a threat assessment and develop a safety plan; depending on what they find, students may be granted access. 

    Can my child have devices other than cellphones? 

    No. The ban also applies to other devices that “provide similar smartphone functionality,” according to a district presentation. These devices include earbuds, smartwatches and smart glasses. 

    Will phones have to be tucked away all day — or just when learning is taking place?

    Yes, cellphones and similar devices will have to be tucked off and away throughout the school day, including during lunch and any other breaks. 

    Students will be allowed to use their phones on campus before and after school hours, however. 

    What are the ramifications for students if they don’t comply?

    Verbal reminders and referrals to a counselor or other campus designee would be given to students who are seen with a device. School administrators could also contact a student’s parent or guardian. 

    Will individual campuses be able to tweak things as they see fit? 

    Local School Leadership Councils throughout the district — composed of school personnel, parents, students and community members — will work to determine how best to implement the policy at their sites. 

    LAUSD’s policy requires each school to hold a Local School Leadership Council meeting while the cellphone policies are being implemented. 





    Source link

  • Cal Poly Humboldt will cover gap between tuition and aid for eligible students next fall

    Cal Poly Humboldt will cover gap between tuition and aid for eligible students next fall


    A new initiative at California State Polytechnic University, Humboldt, seeks to allay students’ doubts about whether they can afford to enroll there. If there is a gap remaining after traditional financial aid awards, Humboldt says it will pick up the balance starting in the fall.

    Cal Poly Humboldt’s Green & Gold Guarantee makes it the second among the 23 California State University (CSU) campuses to launch a last-dollar tuition guarantee after California State University, Fresno began one last fall. Based on previous enrollment trends, the Humboldt program could cover as many as 2,000 students a year.

    The average award is expected to fill a gap of roughly $200 on average, not an enormous amount on its own but enough to provide a sense of stability to worried students, officials say. And by attracting and keeping more students, Humboldt hopes to continue its climb back from a drastic enrollment drop in the past decade. 

    Chrissy Holliday, Humboldt’s vice president for enrollment management and student success, said students will learn whether they are eligible for the guarantee soon after submitting financial aid applications, rather than having to wait for their entire aid package to be determined in detail. “It creates just a level of certainty that they wouldn’t have otherwise,” she said. 

    Cal Poly Humboldt’s guarantee program is open initially to new first-year and transfer students who are California residents or otherwise qualify for in-state tuition and meet financial criteria. It can continue for up to four years for full-time students and two for transfers. There is no separate application after filing the usual Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) or the California Dream Act Application. The guarantee at the campus of roughly 6,000 students covers tuition and mandatory fees — such as those used to fund health services and the student center — but does not cover other expenses like food and housing.

    Admissions trends suggest the program could benefit hundreds of incoming students, if not more. Cal Poly Humboldt estimates that 300 first-time students per year would have received the guarantee in 2023 and 2024 if the program had existed. The university additionally admitted an average of 1,700 applicants who would have been eligible had they chosen to enroll at Humboldt. 

    “When it comes to programs like this, it’s so, so helpful to students that are low-income, maybe first-generation, whose primary barrier to college access is going to be financial aid,” said Rachel Perry, who assists high school students with financial aid applications through her work with the North Coast California Student Opportunity and Access Program Consortium. “There are so many students who I see at my workshops every week that are discouraged because they feel like, ‘Even if I get some financial aid, is it going to be enough?’”

    California State University, Fresno, launched a similar initiative, Tuition Advantage, in fall 2024. Phong Yang, the interim vice president for student affairs and enrollment management at Fresno State, said the program is a response to concerns from students who report in surveys that “the cost of college is always towards the top of their priorities.” Given that reality, university officials were also concerned about how the troubled rollout of the 2024-25 Free Application for Federal Student Aid might impact prospective students.

    In its first year, Fresno State awarded 111 students between $70 and $3,300 through Tuition Advantage, Yang said, at a total cost of roughly $200,000. It’s hard to gauge whether the new program was a deciding factor for those students in its first year, he added, but enrollment rose 3.6% this fall from 2023.

    Students weighing whether to pursue a college degree may have difficulty estimating how much their education will cost because the sticker price on many academic programs can deviate from students’ actual costs after scholarships, financial aid and loans. Living expenses can also add to students’ overall cost of attendance, adding to unpredictability.

    At Cal Poly Humboldt, a full-time, first-time undergraduate living off campus with family and receiving in-state tuition could expect expenses of $12,316 a year including food, housing and other costs before aid, according to federal data for the 2022-23 school year. An in-state student living on campus faced estimated expenses of $24,856 before aid. 

    But if a student qualifies for financial aid, that won’t be their final price tag. At Cal Poly Humboldt, in-state undergraduates in the lowest income bracket — those with a family income of $30,000 or less — faced an average net price of $8,090 for all costs in the 2022-23 school year after average aid awards, the most recent data available. Those in the next-highest income bracket, which is capped at $48,000, had an average net price of $9,623.

    The Green & Gold Guarantee could reduce tuition and fee costs further for selected students. Eligibility will be based on a measure of financial need called the student aid index, which is calculated when students apply for state or federal assistance to attend college. Manny Rodriguez, the director of policy and advocacy in California for The Institute for College Access & Success, said the program seems like it will support low- to moderate-income students, including those who receive a minimum or partial Pell Grant, a common form of federal aid. It also could support students who do not qualify for a Cal Grant because of factors like age or time out of high school, he said, even though they are Pell-eligible.

    Students who take a break from school or return to Humboldt after transferring to another institution lose eligibility. The guarantee is also not open to students in graduate, credential or extended education programs, nor to students who entered Humboldt before fall 2025.

    To be eligible, students must also be enrolled full time, maintain at least a 2.0 GPA and renew their financial aid application annually.

    Cal Poly Humboldt, formerly Humboldt State, has in recent years transitioned to a polytechnic university, concentrating more on science, technology, engineering and mathematics programs. 

    The university in far Northern California anticipated that its polytechnic status would bring a wave of new students after a period of decline. That prediction has proven at least partially true: The student body grew 5% between 2021, the year before its name change became official, and fall 2024. However, overall enrollment remains more than 30% lower than a decade ago in 2015. While Cal Poly Humboldt’s beautiful location attracts students, others have felt too far away from metro areas around the state. 

    Cal State data shows that another challenge has been retaining students who are already enrolled. Though Cal Poly Humboldt’s first year continuation rate has risen slightly in recent school years, it still lags most of its sister campuses in the CSU system. Across the CSU system, 83% of full-time, first-time freshmen who started in fall 2023 continued to a second year, while a slimmer 76% of Cal Poly Humboldt first-year students returned to the campus for year two. 

    Mary Mangubat, a Cal Poly Humboldt student who participates in the Students for Quality Education internship program, which is funded by the California Faculty Association, said one of her concerns about the Green & Gold Guarantee is that it’s not open to current students. “We as continuing students don’t get a lot of support or outreach from the university,” Mangubat said, “and so people often can’t sustain themselves here on this campus and they transfer out.” 

    The university anticipates that the program will cost about $82,000 annually. In its first year, it will receive one-time funding from the university’s contract with food vendor Chartwells, Humboldt VP Holliday said, and will be funded by tuition revenue going forward.

    This post has been updated with the legal name of California State University, Fresno.





    Source link

  • Trump Chooses Lawyer as DC Federal Prosecutor Who is a Putin Puppet and J6 Defender

    Trump Chooses Lawyer as DC Federal Prosecutor Who is a Putin Puppet and J6 Defender


    One of the most important jobs in the federal government is that of the DC federal prosecutor. He or she handles important cases related to national security, among other things. Trump has chosen Ed Martin, a MAGA lawyer who has defended the J6 insurrectionists and insisted that the 2020 election was rigged. Now, The Washington Post reports that Ed Martin has been a loyal defender of Russia and Putin and has repeatedly spouted Putin’s propaganda on Russian state media.

    Spencer S. Hsu and Aaron Schaffer of the Washington Post report:

    Hours before President Donald Trump announced U.S. missile strikes on Syria in response to a chemical attack that killed 90 civilians in April 2017, Ed Martin said on the Russian state television network RT America that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad might not be to blame. Instead, Martin told viewers, the situation was “engineered” in Washington “by the people that want war in Syria.”

    In early 2022, Martin told an interviewer on the same arm of RT’s global network that “there’s no evidence” of a Russian military buildup on Ukraine’s borders, criticizing U.S. officials as warmongering and ignoring Russia’s security concerns. Russia invaded nine days later, igniting a war that continues today.

    Martin is now interim U.S. attorney for D.C. and Trump’s pick to serve full time in the role. But as a conservative activist and former Missouri Republican official, he appeared more than 150 times on RT and Sputnik — networks funded and directed by the Russian government — as a guest commentator from August 2016 to April 2024, according to a search of their websites and the Internet Archive’s database of television broadcasts.

    Martin did not disclose the appearances last month on a Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire, which asks nominees to list all media interviews. Analysis of television archives suggests he went on RT and Sputnik more often than on any major cable network during that span.

    Martin’s frequent appearances, reviewed by The Washington Post, drew rebukes from some national security analysts, who accused him of amplifying anti-American propaganda on Russian outlets that the State Department last year said had moved beyond disinformation to engage in covert influence activities aimed at undermining democracies worldwide for President Vladimir Putin’s regime.

    Martin’s brief tenure as top federal prosecutor in Washington has stoked controversy. Democrats accuse Martin — a Trump “Stop the Steal” organizer who has called the 2020 election and the 2016 Russian election interference investigation “hoaxes” — of violating the law and legal ethics in threatening to investigate or prosecute lawmakers, protesters, journalists and others whom he perceives as undermining Trump’s agenda.

    Former U.S. national security officials and analysts said Martin’s RT and Sputnik appearances, and his failure to disclose them, raise questions about his judgment and candor.

    The U.S. attorney’s office in Washington is the largest in the country and has wide jurisdiction to prosecute important national security offenses, former officials said. Its leader should be alert to the threats and risks posed by Russia and other influence operations from overseas, such as the ones the office has prosecuted in recent years involving Russia and other foreign actors, they argued.

    Open the link to finish the article.

    Based on his views, we can be sure that Mr. Martin will not “be alert to the threats and risks posed by Russia.” Based on his past history, we can expect that he will do what’s best for Russia.



    Source link

  • Which districts are on California’s latest financial danger lists — and why

    Which districts are on California’s latest financial danger lists — and why


    Credit: Alison Yin / EdSource

    The article was updated on March 3 to clarify the period of the school year covered by the two interim financial reports and to include the status of West Contra Costa Unified.

    Este artículo está disponible en Español. Léelo en español.

    Oakland, San Francisco and Hayward have joined four smaller districts on the five-alarm fire list of the state’s most financially stressed districts — those flirting with insolvency.

    They join 32 districts on a second, cautionary list where there’s smoke but no fiscal flames — yet. The second list, released last week, includes Sacramento Unified, several small rural districts where a small drop in enrollment can pose a financial threat, and two San Jose elementary districts, Alum Rock and Franklin-McKinley, which are closing multiple schools in the fall. Not on the list so far this year is West Contra Costa Unified, which is struggling to stay afloat and received a special “lack of going concern” designation the past three years.

    The 39 districts combined are more than last year and four times as many as in 2022-23, when state and federal revenues overflowed. Still, the updated total accounts for only about 4% of the state’s districts.

    Michael Fine, CEO of the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team, a state agency whose job is to monitor districts’ finances to prevent insolvency, blamed the financial pressures on declining enrollments and the termination of record federal Covid aid for schools. 

    Both factors are forcing districts to make difficult choices that will affect students. Some districts are offering retirement buyouts and/or laying off teachers, counselors and other staff because staff salaries constitute about 80% of overall costs. Many districts on the list also bear the cost of vacillation — a failure to act sooner to cut costs before deficits mount, Fine said.    

    “From my standpoint as an advocate of best practice, there should be nobody on the list because the two predominant factors are predictable,” Fine said. “Why weren’t they dealing with these a year ago, two years ago, and three years ago?”

    Those questions are appropriate for Oakland Unified. Since pre-pandemic 2018-19, its enrollment has fallen 7% — by 2,608 students to 33,916. The district received a total of $280 million in emergency Covid relief in 2021 and 2022, but that expired on Sept. 30, 2024, as that aid did for all districts.

    With many of its elementary schools housing around 300 students, Oakland Superintendent Kyla Johnson-Tramell proposed plans to close small schools, potentially saving millions of dollars, and, in December, to merge 10 elementary schools into five. The school board rejected the plans. In 2023, following a seven-day strike, the district, aiming to reduce the exodus of teachers to better-paying area districts in a high-cost region, gave teachers a 10% raise and a $5,000 one-time bonus. All of those factors have led to a mammoth $95 million deficit out of a $960 million budget.

    “It didn’t feel like we had a deficit growing because we had all the one-time money,” Johnson-Trammell told The Oaklandside last week. “We have to continue to give raises. It’s not a crisis. We made investments, and we have to figure out a way to pay for it.”

    California’s early warning system

    Each year, between passing their annual budgets, all school districts must file two reports to FCMAT that summarize their current financial health and project ahead. Oakland and the other six most-distressed districts filed a “negative” status in their first interim report. This means they likely won’t be able to meet financial obligations, including payroll, in the current or next fiscal year. The 32 other districts filed a “qualified” status, meaning they’re on track to run out of money in the next two fiscal years.

    Districts self-certify their reports. They filed their first interim report on Dec. 15, covering the four months, through Oct. 31, since the July 1 fiscal year began. The second interim report, filed March 15, covers the year through Jan. 31, enabling districts to factor in revenue estimates from the governor’s initial budget, including the projected cost-of-living increase they rely on. March 15 is also the deadline for notifying employees if they could be laid off — key evidence of how districts are dealing with a potential revenue problem.

    How are negative-status districts responding?

    Oakland had certified as “qualified” for 14 straight reports before filing a negative status in the latest report. 

    “Oakland is not a surprise; it’s been struggling,” Fine said. “It hasn’t taken the necessary corrective action that it has needed. The district adopts lots of plans and lots of documents, but then carries few of those out.”

    However, last week, Oakland’s school board passed a plan to eliminate 97 positions for teachers, administrators and noncertificated jobs, including tutors, case managers and attendance monitors. More ideas are on the table.

    Across the bay, San Francisco Unified has been in turmoil, reflected in the recall of two board members and the resignation of its last superintendent. It initially filed a negative financial status in 2023-24.  

    Last month, to resolve a $113 million deficit, equal to about 10% of the district’s budget, San Francisco’s board voted to approve preliminary layoff notices for 395 teachers, social workers and counselors, 164 teachers aides, and 278 administrators and other staff. Retirements and resignations will likely result in fewer layoffs.

    Hayward wasn’t on the state’s radar for financial troubles, Fine said, but a new superintendent and chief business officer “inherited some issues and did the right thing” by self-certifying negative. “They would be an example of a district that will most likely turn the corner,” he said.

    Most of the seven districts will work their way off the negative list, he said. Two that probably won’t are Plumas Unified and Weed Union Elementary, Fine said.

    “We’re very, very concerned about Plumas,” Fine said.  “They have already borrowed to a point they can’t pay back, and there has been some finessing of the data to make it look better than it is.” The only district in Plumas County, it has four schools, about 1,700 students and a $42 million budget.

    Weed Union is an unusual case. The one-school district with a $7.5 million budget is the first in a decade to operate without an approved budget, having been rejected by the Siskiyou County Office of Education and the California Department of Education. Its problem, said Fine, is that it is overextended on a facility upgrade, and the burden of paying for it will overwhelm the district’s operating budget.

    If insolvent, what then?

    A district that runs out of money will get a state loan but lose its autonomy, and a state-appointed trustee will oversee the district’s operations. The district will honor existing contracts, but the trustee will have veto power over new contracts and other decisions that the school board makes. The district will bear the cost of the state’s oversight and legal fees and interest on a 20-year loan. 

    “It gets worse before it gets better,” Fine said. “Receivership takes away local control.” In the 34 years since the Legislature created FCMAT and the oversight process, only eight districts have needed a bailout loan. The most recent is Inglewood Unified, which received $29 million in 2012. Oakland would be the first two-timer. It’s still 18 months away from paying off the $100 million it received in 2003 and 2006.

    Is this the most precarious year for districts?

    Far from it. In the second interim report in 2011-12, 176 districts filed a “qualified” status and a dozen were “negative” – together, about one in five districts. Amid plummeting state revenues in the wake of the Great Recession, the state cut $6 billion and delayed payments to K-12 districts. The average district had not set aside nearly enough money in reserve for a crisis. This year, the average district has set aside 22% of its operating budget in reserve, more than three times as much.

    The difference is “night and day,” said Fine. “During the Great Recession, the state made cuts to district revenues. Today, the issues are all local.”





    Source link

  • Map: MMR and full vaccination rates in California kindergartners

    Map: MMR and full vaccination rates in California kindergartners


    This interactive map shows kindergartners’ vaccination rates at more than 6,000 public and private schools across California. According to the state health department, at least 95% of students need the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine to maintain herd immunity and prevent outbreaks. Yet in many parts of the state — including areas around Sacramento, Oakland, the Central Valley, and Los Angeles — vaccination rates fall short of that threshold, raising concerns about community vulnerability.

    Data source: California Department of Public Health and EdSource Analysis





    Source link

  • Conversations on the Future and Impact of Small Colleges – Edu Alliance Journal


    Small colleges have long played a significant role in shaping American higher education. They may not make national headlines every day, but their impact on students, communities, and the broader landscape of learning is undeniable. That’s why Kent Barnds and I, Dean Hoke, created Small College America. Its mission is to present critical discussions at the forefront by interviewing small college higher education leaders, policy experts, and innovators. The podcast delves into the evolving role of small colleges, their economic impact, innovative strategies for sustainability, and how they can continue to provide a highly personalized educational experience.

    Each episode explores the distinctiveness of small colleges—through conversations with presidents, provosts, foundation leaders, and changemakers who are deeply engaged in the work of shaping the future. We focus on the real issues small colleges face—from enrollment shifts and financial pressures to mission clarity, leadership, and collaborative innovation.

    Why is now the perfect time for this podcast? Higher education faces unprecedented challenges, and small colleges, with their adaptability and personalized approaches, offer valuable lessons and innovative solutions critical to the broader education landscape.

    Our most recent episodes include:

    • Wendy Sherman Heckler and Chet Haskell – From Otterbein University and Antioch University, respectively these two leaders discuss their groundbreaking collaboration known as the Coalition for the Common Good. It’s a bold new model for partnership between mission-driven institutions focused on shared values and long-term sustainability.
    • Eric Lindberg—Executive Director of the Austin E. Knowlton Foundation in Cincinnati, Ohio, shares insights into the Foundation’s commitment to supporting small colleges, reflects on his own liberal arts experience, and outlines how strategic philanthropy can strengthen institutional resilience.
    • Dr. Paaige Turner, Provost and Executive Vice President at Aurora University discusses her transition into the role after serving as Dean at Ball State University. She brings a fresh perspective on leadership, regional relevance, and the evolving communication needs of today’s students.

    Upcoming Guests:

    We’re excited to welcome several new voices to the podcast in upcoming episodes:

    • Charles Kim, retired Managing Director at Kaufman Hall and former head of its Higher Education division, now serves on the boards of Augustana College and Westminster College.
    • Scott Wiegandt, Director of Athletics at Bellarmine University, who helped lead the university’s move from NCAA Division II to Division I.
    • Karin Fischer, senior writer for The Chronicle of Higher Education and author of the Latitudes newsletter, brings deep insight into the global and domestic challenges facing small colleges.
    • Steve Bahls, President Emeritus of Augustana College and national expert on shared governance, discusses how collaboration can lead to institutional agility and long-term success.
    • Matthew Ward, Vice President of Enrollment Management at California Lutheran University.
    • Liz Nino, Executive Director of International Enrollment at Augustana College.
    • Dr. Marco Clark, President of Holy Cross College at Notre Dame, Indiana.

    Whether you’re a small college president, a prospective student, an alum, or simply someone passionate about the future of higher education, we invite you to join us. Each episode of Small College America is a chance to learn, reflect, and engage with the people who are shaping this vital sector.

    Subscribe on your favorite podcast platform or listen directly at https://www.podpage.com/small-college-america/. We hope you’ll tune in. If there’s a story or college you think we should feature, let us know.

    Small colleges are changing higher education—be part of the conversation.


    Dean Hoke is Managing Partner of Edu Alliance Group, a higher education consultancy, and a Senior Fellow with the Sagamore Institute. He formerly served as President/CEO of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA). With decades of experience in higher education leadership, consulting, and institutional strategy, he brings a wealth of knowledge on small colleges’ challenges and opportunities. Dean, along with Kent Barnds, is a co-host for the podcast series Small College America. 



    Source link

  • How to describe middling and poor test scores? State Board frets over the right words

    How to describe middling and poor test scores? State Board frets over the right words


    Students in a Fresno Unified classroom.

    Credit: Fresno Unified / Flickr

    Ending several months of uncertainty, the California State Board of Education on Wednesday chose new labels to describe how students perform on the four levels of achievement on its standardized tests.

    The decision was difficult. The 90 minutes of presentations and discussions offered lessons in the subtleties of language and the inferences of words.

    Board members said they were aware of the need to send the right messages to many parents, who had criticized the California Department of Education’s previous choices for labeling low test scores as vague euphemisms for bad news. 

    “Labels matter,” said board member Francisco Escobedo, executive director of the National Center for Urban Transformation at San Diego State. “Knowledge is a continuum, and how we describe students in different levels has a powerful impact.”’

    Researchers have warned that parents are getting confusing messages, with inflated grades on courses and declining scores on standardized tests of how well their children are doing in recovering from Covid setbacks in learning. The new labels will apply to scoring levels for the state science assessments and for the Smarter Balanced English language arts and math tests.

    Board members quickly agreed on “Advanced” for Level 4 and “Proficient” for Level 3 labels, the top two levels of scores. But their selection of “Developing” for Level 2 and “Minimal” for Level 1 differed from the consensus of parents, students and teachers who had been offered various options during focus groups in December and January.

    They had preferred “Basic” for Level 2 and “Below Basic” for Level 1.  The terms are clear, simple and familiar, a summary of the discussions said. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) classifies Basic as the lowest of its three levels, and California’s old state tests, which the state abandoned a decade ago to switch to Smarter Balanced, used Basic and Below Basic for scoring criteria as well.

    But for some veteran educators on the board, familiarity has bred contempt, or at least bad memories, of No Child Left Behind (NCLB), the federal law under the administrations of Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush. Schools were under heavy pressure to increase their math and English language arts scores, or potentially face sanctions.

    “I had a visceral reaction to the word Basic,” said board member and veteran teacher Haydee Rodriguez. “I remember NCLB and how finite that felt for students.” The feedback should be encouraging, not a label that discourages growth, as Basic did under NCLB, she said.

    She and Kim Patillo Brownson, a parent of two teenagers who served as a policy director at the Advancement Project, a civil rights organization, also pointed out that “basic” has a different connotation for students in 2025. It’s slang for a boring and uninteresting person.  

    “Calling a student Basic is an absolute insult in 2025,” said Rodriguez. “It could shut a child down.”

    Board President Linda Darling-Hammond agreed. “If Basic is being used derogatorily, one can only imagine how Below Basic will be used. It is a real consideration; the meaning is different for adults.”

    Board members turned to other words that had been presented to the focus groups. They agreed the choices should be frank, not Pollyannaish or dispiriting.

    With Level 2, the purpose should be “trying to light a fire under parents to realize there is work to do,” said Patillo Brownson.

    Stating that “Below Basic” says a student is failing, Escobedo preferred “Developing” for Level 1 and “Emerging” for Level 2. These terms are consistent with labels used for scoring the progress of English learners.

    Patillo Brownson called Emerging “vague” and supported “Basic.”

    Board Vice President Cynthia Glover Woods, who was chief academic officer of the Riverside County Office of Education before her retirement, favored “Minimum” for Level 1 because “it is important we are clear for students and parents that students scoring at the level have a minimal understanding of grade-level knowledge.”

    Sharing the perspective of her peers, the student board member on the board, Julia Clauson, a senior at Bella Vista High School in Sacramento, recommended substituting “Approaching” for “Basic,” so as not to deter students from trying challenging courses. “Older students make academic decisions (based on what signals they get), so language matters,” she said.

    The County Superintendents association also endorsed “Approaching” for Level 2 and “Developing” or “Emerging” for Level 1.

    The board initiated what turned into a multi-month decision because of growing dissatisfaction with the labels that had been used since the first Smarter Balanced testing in 2015. They were Standard Not Met for Level 1, Standard Nearly Met for Level 2, Standard Met for Level 3 and Standard Exceeded for Level 4. Focus groups by the California Department of Education found that parents were confused about what “standard” meant. They found Standard Not Met as discouraging and Standard Nearly Met as unclear.

    But a coalition of student advocacy groups, including Teach Plus, Children Now and Innovate Public Schools, along with the County Superintendents association and the Association of California School Administrators, criticized the labels for Levels 1 and 2 that the California Department of Education recommended as their replacements as soft-pedaling euphemisms for poor scorers. The department had proposed Inconsistent for Level 1 and Foundational for Level 2.

    At its December meeting, the board told the department to try again with more focus groups.

    Changing the labels to Advanced, Proficient, Developing and Minimal won’t change how scores are determined; the individual scores within each achievement band have remained the same in all the 18 member states that take all or some of the Smarter Balanced tests, which are given to students in grades three through eight and once in high school, usually in 11th grade.

    However, additional work is needed to communicate the changes to parents and students. The department and its testing contractor, ETS, will spell out the differences between performing at the various levels in each subject and grade and the level of improvement needed to raise scores.

    Tony Alpert, executive director of Smarter Balanced, pointed out that performance differences are a continuum with students showing gaps in some grade-level skills but not others. A student scoring at Level 1 may have answered some questions showing knowledge at grade level. As scores progress from Levels 2 to 4, students demonstrate increasing accuracy and complexity in their knowledge and skills.

    Students who reach Level 3 have the knowledge to succeed in future coursework. Research has determined that for California high school students, Level 3 correlates with preparation for first-year courses at California State University.

    The state board hoped that the label changes and new explanations would be ready for this spring’s testing results. Instead, they will take effect in 2026.





    Source link

  • West Contra Costa makes big push to get kids to class – and raise revenue while doing it

    West Contra Costa makes big push to get kids to class – and raise revenue while doing it


    Verde Elementary School in West Contra Costa Unified School District

    Top Takeaways
    • Raising attendance would improve student outcomes and help the district achieve a balanced budget.
    • The district will focus on boosting attendance of all students, not just those who are “chronically absent,” using a range of attendance-improvement strategies.
    • Improving attendance will require an investment of funds and offering incentives, experts say.

    To boost student attendance, the West Contra Costa Unified School District has launched a comprehensive plan to increase attendance by 2 percentage points this school year. 

    The plan will be reviewed by the school board at its meeting on Wednesday.

    The challenge is in part an educational one. If students aren’t in class, they’re far less likely to succeed. It is also a financial strategy that is crucial to the district’s attempts to fend off insolvency and a state takeover for the second time in 30 years. 

    That’s because the main source of state funding for schools in California is based not just on how many students are enrolled, but on how many students actually show up each day for class.  

    But bumping up attendance, even by a few percentage points, is not as easy as it might seem, regardless of the district.  

    So what happens in this 29,000-student district in the San Francisco Bay Area, which includes Richmond and several adjacent communities, also holds lessons for numerous other financially struggling districts in California and nationally. 

    According to interim Superintendent Kim Moses, the math is simple: For every 1 percentage point increase in attendance, the district can raise $2.75 million in additional state funding. 

    Raising attendance by nearly 3 percentage points would generate over $7 million — about the same amount the district is projecting it will have to reduce its budget during each of the coming two years to achieve a balanced budget. 

    “It’s the biggest lever that we have,” board President Leslie Reckler, who is fully behind the attendance strategy to avert even more cuts in programs and staff than the district has already made, said in an interview. “We get paid by who shows up.”

     Moses told the school board at a recent meeting, “If we are successful in increasing our attendance, that is a way to increase revenue. Then we can rescind the reductions we are proposing.”

    Until now, the district’s attendance improvement plan has focused on “chronically absent” students — those who miss 10% or more instructional days per year. That has yielded results, pushing overall attendance rates in the district to 92.3% last fall, just below the state average. 

    But over the last few months, attendance rates in the district have started to drift down again, to 89.5% in February, according to district figures. 

    Natalie Tovani-Walchuk, vice president of local impact for Go Public Schools, an advocacy organization working in several Bay Area school districts, including West Contra Costa, speculates that some of the decline could be related to illnesses — the flu, Covid, norovirus and RSV — that simultaneously struck the district in recent months. It could also be that some immigrant parents fear bringing their children to school because of the Trump administration’s crackdown on undocumented immigrants.  

    “All of this creates conditions which you can’t control,” said Tovani-Walchuck, a former school principal born and raised in Richmond. 

    Aiming to boost attendance of all students

    After initially focusing on chronically absent students, the district is now aiming to boost the attendance of all students, and to focus on schoolwide attendance-improvement strategies, including:

    • Targeting schools with the lowest attendance and developing “individualized action plans” for those schools.
    • Expecting schools to implement activities that reinforce positive attendance habits, such as recognizing students whose attendance improves and working more closely with families “to build stronger connections between school and home.”  
    • Helping schools use a toolkit developed by the district, including prepared scripts in communicating with parents, along with “action plans” for targeting lagging attendance to promote “Stronger Together: Show Up, Rise Up,” the theme of the attendance campaign. 
    • Recruiting more parents, representatives of community-based organizations and community members to participate in the district’s Student Attendance Review Board, to which students who are repeatedly absent or truant can be referred.   

    But Michael Fine, CEO of the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team, an agency set up by the state to help districts in difficult financial straits, said, “There is a limit to how much improvement in attendance can be made.” 

    A year ago, his agency issued a report concluding that, despite financial and other improvements, West Contra Costa faced a high risk of insolvency.  

    A realistic goal, Fine said, would be to increase attendance by 1 percentage point each year over the next three years. He pointed out that the district will probably have to spend money on extra staff time and incentives to generate interest among students, parents and schools. 

    “Programs like this cost money, so you have to spend to be successful,” Fine said. 

    Fine recalls that when he was a deputy superintendent at Riverside Unified, the district persuaded local businesses to award a used car to high school seniors who achieved perfect attendance across their entire K-12 careers, or other incentives like computers and bicycles for meeting less ambitious goals. His district spent about $250,000 a year on the program, but generated $1.2 million in increased attendance revenue.  

    Increasing attendance is especially challenging because there are many reasons why students don’t show up for school, all detailed in a presentation to be considered by the board at its monthly meeting this week. These include lack of transportation, illness, parent work schedules, child care constraints, and students feeling disengaged, unsupported and bored at school, plus, in some cases, severe mental health issues. 

    As a result, any initiative to reduce absenteeism demands a range of strategies to address its underlying causes. 

    Hedy Chang, executive director of Attendance Works, a nonprofit organization focusing on attendance, said West Contra Costa Unified appears to be on the right track by surveying parents and identifying why individual students don’t come to school. Another plus, she said, is the district’s creation of so-called community schools, which already work with social service organizations that can also help. 

    “It looks like the district has some things in place,” she said.  But she also cautioned that schools with large numbers of low-income students, like many in West Contra Costa, will likely experience higher absenteeism rates and have to come up with multifaceted responses to overcome them. 

    Building positive relationships with parents

    The district says one school that has made notable strides is Verde Elementary, a community school serving transitional kindergarten through eighth grade students in North Richmond, an unincorporated area of the district. 

    The efforts of Martha Nieto, Verde’s “school community outreach worker,” have been central to the school’s efforts to boost attendance. 

    Nieto, a mother of six who was born in Mexico, says that a key to getting kids to school is building positive relationships with parents. Each day, the school systematically records which students are absent. Attendance clerk Patricia Martines then calls parents’ homes, sometimes with the assistance of school secretary Patricia Farias, who attended the school and still lives in the neighborhood. 

    Each Friday, Nieto  offers what she calls a “School Smarts” class for parents to learn how to get involved in the school. As for students, Nieto provides incentives to improve attendance with modest gifts like a soccer ball, or free ice cream or nachos, which she also hands out on Friday mornings. Students with perfect attendance are awarded medals at “Celebration of Learning” events held regularly in the school cafeteria. 

    The challenge, Go Public Schools’ Tovani-Walchuk says, is to extend efforts like these across the entire district. 

    “These are moments of real strength, and we’re seeing what is truly possible,” she said, referring to Verde Elementary. “But it has not been yet systematized where every school has their school community outreach worker doing this work. That’s really determined site by site, depending on its priorities.”

    Verde Elementary school secretary Victoria Farías, who attended the school as a student, assists with keeping track of attendance.
    Credit: Louis Freedberg / EdSource

    School board member Demetrio Gonzalez-Hoy says that in addition to boosting the attendance of existing students, there needs to be more emphasis on attracting new ones to the district. That’s because the district’s financial plight is largely due to student enrollment that has declined by an average of 3.1 percentage points over the previous four years, according to the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team report. 

    “It has to be a two-pronged approach,” he said. “We need to get families moving into our community to come to our schools. We don’t want to be a place where we have to be closing schools.”

    “If we want to continue to thrive as a district, we have no other option,” he said. 





    Source link

  • Renewed push to reshape ethnic studies with oversight and new standards

    Renewed push to reshape ethnic studies with oversight and new standards


    A student shares her research results during a class presentation.

    Credit: Photo by Allison Shelley/The Verbatim Agency for EDUimages

    Este artículo está disponible en Español. Léelo en español.

    TOP TAKEAWAYS
    • A new Assembly bill aims to swap a voluntary curriculum with academic standards that would direct what should be taught.
    • The focus would remain teaching the triumphs, struggles and perspectives of Native Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans and Black Americans.
    • The bill would restrict an alternative Liberated Ethnic Studies curriculum, which focuses on the power of white supremacy and condemns Israel as an oppressive colonial state.

    Thirty-one legislators, led by the Legislative Jewish Caucus, are calling for a do-over on teaching ethnic studies after a half-dozen years of strife.

    The authors are convinced that flaws in a voluntary model curriculum have led to complaints and lawsuits alleging that some districts are using biased and antisemitic course content and instruction. Therefore, they propose starting again by creating academic standards that would direct what is taught in the course and how.

    Assembly Bill 1468 would require the State Board of Education to restart a curriculum process that was highly contested six years ago. It resulted in multiple drafts and an uneasy compromise of language and goals reflected in a nearly 700-page California Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum. Since its adoption in 2021, school districts have had the responsibility to create their own curriculum based largely on interpretations of ambiguities of what constitutes an ethnic studies course.

    “When California believes in something, we write standards for it,” said Assemblymember Dawn Addis, D-Morro Bay, a former teacher. “Whether it’s English language arts, English language development, history, social science — there are different sets of standards. It creates a common understanding of what kids are supposed to be able to learn and do, and what teachers are supposed to teach.”

    “What’s happened in our schools is, one, antisemitism. But two, it’s tearing a lot of communities apart over something that is supposed to be really beneficial to children when done right.”

    In addition to creating academic standards, the bill would create new disclosure and oversight measures that don’t apply to the current model framework or academic standards for other subjects. They would require:

    • school districts to submit ethnic studies curricula to the California Department of Education for review
    • the Instructional Quality Commission, which advises the State Board of Education, to recommend a framework and instructional materials aligned to the new standards;
    • the California Department of Education to report annually on compliance with state laws;
    • providers of content and standards trainers to submit their materials to the state to ensure compliance with the standards.

    Opposition will likely be intense.

    “The bill’s push for increased oversight and censorship is deeply concerning, restricting students’ ability to engage in critical discussions on human rights, globalism, and social justice,” said Tricia Gallagher-Geursten, a lecturer in ethnic studies at the University of California, San Diego. “Furthermore, it diminishes the intellectual integrity of ethnic studies by dismissing the foundational theories and pedagogies that define all academic disciplines, violating the principle of academic freedom.”

    “AB 1468 is driven by those seeking to regulate educational content by silencing perspectives they oppose,” she said. “At this crucial moment, the UC Ethnic Studies Faculty Council stands with California students and our diverse communities in urging legislators to oppose AB 1468 and protect the integrity of ethnic studies.”

    Last year, the University of California (UC) and California State University (CSU) ethnic studies faculty and the California Teachers Association led the opposition to a less sweeping bill that would have required more disclosure of a proposed ethnic studies course and a review by a committee of teachers and parents. The California Teachers Association and UC and CSU ethnic studies faculty members criticized it as unwarranted and unprecedented interference with instruction.

    Addis and Assemblymember Rick Zbur, D-Los Angeles, introduced the bill late in the session and withdrew it because of a lack of support. This year’s 32 co-authors include legislators outside the 18-member Jewish Legislative Caucus, including Assemblymembers David Alvarez, D-San Diego, and Sharon Quirk-Silva, D-Fullerton.

    “Jewish students are facing a very difficult environment in the community at large, certainly on college campuses,” said Alvarez. “It’s important that we acknowledge that and that we have curriculum that’s standards-based, as we do with other curriculums, reflects California’s values and steers away from antisemitism.”

    Targeting Liberated Ethnic Studies

    The legislation would curtail districts that have adopted Liberated Ethnic Studies, although it doesn’t name the curriculum or the consortium identified with promoting it. UC and CSU ethnic studies professors and instructors developed the Liberated version as an alternative after the State Board largely rejected the first draft of the model curriculum, which they had written, as ideological and biased against Jews.

    The state’s final version of the model curriculum presents a multiperspective exploration of the culture, achievements and struggles, past and ongoing, of the four primary racial and ethnic groups in California. They are Native Americans, Black Americans, Asian Americans, and Hispanic Americans.

    The Liberated version takes a perspective that stresses the ongoing oppression of people of color through white supremacy and capitalism. It directs students to examine their own self-identities as to how their race, ethnicity, sexuality, and wealth and privilege intersect with others. Ethnic studies teachers say students find the courses uplifting, not pessimistic.

    To date, the state has kept no records on curricula that districts have adopted, but more than two dozen districts have contracted with groups affiliated with Liberated trainers and leaders.

    Charges of antisemitism

    Legislators made an explicit reference to that first draft when they passed Assembly Bill 101, which established the as-yet unfunded mandate for districts to offer a one-semester ethnic studies course in high school starting in fall 2025 and to require taking it for a high school diploma starting in 2029-30.

    They wrote, “it is the intent of the Legislature that (districts) not use the portions of the draft model curriculum that were not adopted by the Instructional Quality Commission due to concerns related to bias, bigotry, and discrimination.”

    Both Attorney General Rob Bonta and Brooks Allen, executive director of the State Board of Education and an adviser to Gov. Gavin Newsom, have sent separate memos reminding districts to follow that prohibition. Nonetheless, proponents of the Liberated curriculum point to references to oppression and “intersectionality” included in the final framework to argue that their approach is consistent with the state framework.

    The Liberated curriculum also emphasizes solidarity with the Palestinian people in their struggle against domination by Israel, a modern “settler colonial state” oppressing people of color.

    The slaughter of 1,200 Israelis by Hamas fighters in communities bordering Gaza in October 2023, followed by more than a year of fighting and bombings that have displaced hundreds of thousands of Gazans and caused the deaths of an estimated 40,000,  have heightened tensions in the classroom. Jewish organizations and parents have complained that one-sided lessons against Zionism and the Israeli government have blended into overt antisemitism.

    The federal Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights is investigating discrimination allegations against Berkeley Unified. The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law has filed complaints against Fremont High School, Santa Clara Unified, and, in its latest filing, against Etiwanda School District in Rancho Cucamonga.  It alleges that a seventh grade girl’s middle school failed to intervene to stop physical abuse and repeated antisemitic slurs, including a Hitler “joke,” by other students. Last month, Santa Ana Unified agreed to discontinue three Liberated-affiliated ethnic studies courses after a lawsuit over public meetings violations revealed antisemitic bias and slurs by staff members.

    The proposed bill does not prohibit discussions of the Israel-Palestine issue, avoiding a trespass on free speech. However, it calls for ethnic studies to “focus on the domestic experience and stories of historically marginalized peoples in American society.”

    Like Assembly Bill 101 before it, the bill would ensure that ethnic studies “remains true to its original intent — promoting inclusivity, respect, and historical accuracy for all communities with a domestic focus,” said Sen. Josh Becker, D-Menlo Park.

    The 2016 law that authorized the creation of a model curriculum framework called for a committee consisting of faculty members of university ethnic studies departments, K-12 teachers, and administrators experienced in teaching the subject. The committee members whom the State Board appointed ended up writing the disputed first draft. AB 1468 also calls for a similar advisory committee, the majority of whom would be experts in ethnic studies.

    Wouldn’t that possibly lead to standards similar to those in the model curriculum’s first draft — and a repeat of the animosities of the first process?

    Bill author Zbur disagrees. The governor, not the State Board of Education, would name the members, and the language of the bill’s intent would make clear that the experts would be more “traditional” and not proponents of the Liberated curriculum. The advisory committee would also include representatives of communities most frequently targeted by hate crimes, thus assuring a voice from the Jewish community.

    Newsom would appear sympathetic to the effort. In April 2024, he pledged in his Golden State Plan to Counter Antisemitism that he “will work with the Jewish Caucus and Legislature to pursue legislation strengthening the guardrails established by AB 101.”

    His administration has not commented on the new bill.





    Source link