برچسب: and

  • California still lags behind pre-pandemic reading and math scores on national assessment

    California still lags behind pre-pandemic reading and math scores on national assessment


    Credit: Andrew Reed / EdSource

    Like most of the nation, California students were stuck in low gear again in 2024. On the National Assessment for Educational Progress (NAEP), they performed significantly below their pre-pandemic scores in math and reading.

    The gaps between the lowest-performing students, between low-income and well-off students, and among some racial and ethnic groups continued to widen overall, an ominous sign that many students are unprepared for high school and beyond.

    “Our nation is facing complex challenges in reading,” said Peggy Carr, commissioner of the National Center for Education Statistics, which administers NAEP, noting that nationwide, the percentage of eighth graders reading Below Basic, the lowest achievers, was 33% and the highest in the assessment’s history. The 40% of fourth graders scoring Below Basic was the highest in 20 years. 

    On the fourth grade reading assessment for NAEP, scores in five states, in light blue, declined compared with 2022, no states’ scores improved, and 47 states, including California, saw no statistically significant change.
    Credit: National Assessment of Educational Progress

    Also known as The Nation’s Report Card, NAEP is the only assessment that a representative number of students in fourth, eighth, and 12th grades in every state and Washington, D.C., take every two years—and thus, the most reliable measure of performance among states. The results for fourth and eighth graders were released today.

    On NAEP’s 500-point scale, where one or 2-point gains are common, and movement of 3 or more points are notable, California’s scores have consistently trailed the nation in both reading and math, although the gap in reading has narrowed. That had been especially so for eighth graders, whose score equaled the nation’s in 2022.

    But that result was the exception in a year in which scores fell sharply nationally and to a lesser extent in California in the aftermath of the pandemic and slow recovery. Nationally, math scores in 2022 dropped 8 points in eighth grade and 5 points in fourth, the largest drop in NAEP’s 25-year history.

    The latest scores show mostly no progress. Scores in fourth and eighth grade reading fell again, leaving California 9 points and the nation 8 points below 2017. Math was mixed — up in fourth grade, but not enough to catch 2019, with eighth grade taking another dip.

    The average scores, however, mask widening disparities between the highest and lowest-performing students. On fourth grade reading, student scores at the 90th achievement percentile fell 1 point between 2019 and 2024, and scores at the 75th percentile fell 3 points. However, scores for students in the 10th percentile fell 10 points, and for students in the 25th percentile, they fell 8 points.  

    The pattern looks about the same throughout the nation, with a serious long-term impact, said Eric Hanushek, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, who also was provided an early peek at the scores. “The top scorers are coming back, and the bottom is doing worse, which will affect income distribution over a lifetime,” he said.

    On fourth grade reading, California scored higher than three states (West Virginia, New Mexico, and Alaska), statistically about the same as 35 other states and behind 13 states. Only two states, Louisiana in reading and Alabama in math, scored above pre-pandemic levels of 2019.

    NAEP scores fall within four bands of achievement: Advanced, Proficient, Basic and Below Basic. The differences by race and ethnicity remained stark on all the tests. For example, on the fourth grade reading test, 7% of Black students and 19% of Latino students scored Proficient and Advanced, while 50% of Asian and 44% of white students scored that high.

    For all students, only 31% of California’s fourth graders scored Proficient or Advanced, compared with 32% nationally.

    NAEP defines students performing at the Basic level as having partially mastered knowledge and skills required to perform at a Proficient level. Proficient students have demonstrated a grasp of challenging material and can apply the knowledge to real-world situations and analytical skills. Advanced students showed superior performance.

    Scoring Below Basic doesn’t mean students in fourth grade can’t read. “We’re saying that they’re unlikely to be able to determine the meaning of a familiar word using context from the text. That’s a critical skill that students will really need for entering middle school,” said Lesley Muldoon, executive director of the National Assessment Governing Board, an independent body that Congress created to set policy for NAEP.

    Once education experts and advocates have had a chance to review the results and findings of surveys that the National Center for Educational Statistics conducted of students and teachers, there will be theories for the low scores and calls for efforts to address them. 

    In The 74 earlier this week, columnist Chad Aldeman evaluated a half-dozen explanations for declining scores nationwide. They include less reading and more TikTok; the abandonment of federal accountability for school performance, starting in the latter years of the Obama administration; the adoption of Common Core state standards a decade ago; and soaring student absenteeism rates post-Covid. While they have come down, the rates remain disproportionately high for the lowest-performing students, contributing to widening gaps in achievement.

    Dan Goldhaber, director of the Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research at the American Institutes for Research and one of a few education experts who got an early look at the NAEP results, would add another cause to the mix: emerging evidence of grade inflation, connected to the pandemic, and perceptions parents have of their own children’s learning. 

    “So the most immediate information that parents get is not state or NAEP tests. It’s (high) grades that are not showing parents where their kids stand in real time, to allow them to provide feedback to their kids and encourage them.”

    Goldhaber said there is evidence that teacher quality is largely what moves students; he’d focus on the inequitable distribution of schools with less qualified and credentialed teachers.

    Not comparable to Smarter Balanced

    Students also take annual state tests in math and English language arts, but NAEP officials warn not to make comparisons since each state’s measurements and standards are different. California aligns its tests to the Common Core standards, while NAEP’s tests are based on what experts say students in each grade should know. It’s harder to score Proficient or above on NAEP than on most state tests. In 2024, 44% of all California fourth graders students scored at or above Proficient on the Smarter Balanced test.

    About 11,000 students in California took NAEP, and only portions of it. That’s too few for individual students, schools, and districts to receive scores, with one exception. Annually, a representative number of students in 25 large districts, including Los Angeles Unified and San Diego Unified, take the Trial Urban District Assessment or TUDA. They provided one of the few bright spots in 2024.

    Los Angeles was one of three districts whose fourth grade math scores didn’t drop during the pandemic; it rose slightly from 2019 to 2024, and San Diego’s fell less than 2 points, a statistically insignificant amount. In eighth grade, Los Angeles dropped less than a point, and San Diego’s 8-point drop was lower than the national average for the districts. Los Angeles’ reading scores in fourth and eighth grade didn’t decline at all post-pandemic; San Diego’s increased a statistically insignificant amount in fourth grade, and its decline of 3 points was about the average for the TUDA districts.  

    California’s low percentage of students scoring Proficient or better on fourth grade reading and math (34% Proficient in fourth grade, 29% in eighth grade) will likely lead to calls for funding for teacher training on the new standards and evidence-based practices in kindergarten through second grade. 

    Gov. Gavin Newsom has proposed allocating $500 million in the 2025-26 budget for teacher training and to encourage districts to use discretionary funding on summer programs and tutoring to make up for lost Covid learning. Some states whose scores exceeded California’s on fourth-grade reading, including Mississippi, Connecticut and Colorado, adopted comprehensive reading plans grounded in the science of reading.





    Source link

  • Memo Leaked about Cuts to State Department, Slashing Africa Offices, Climate and Human Rights Agencies

    Memo Leaked about Cuts to State Department, Slashing Africa Offices, Climate and Human Rights Agencies


    The New York Times published a leaked plan to reorganize the Trump State Department; Rubio disowned it. Its goal is to align the State Department and foreign policy with Trump’s “America First” agenda. It’s a very scary vision of Fortress America, cut off from the rest of the world, with no concern for democracy, climate change, human rights, or Africa.

    The Times reported:

    A draft of a Trump administration executive order proposes a drastic restructuring of the State Department, including eliminating almost all of its Africa operations and shutting down embassies and consulates across the continent.

    The draft also calls for cutting offices at State Department headquarters that address climate change and refugee issues, as well as democracy and human rights concerns.

    The purpose of the executive order, which could be signed soon by President Trump, is to impose “a disciplined reorganization” of the State Department and “streamline mission delivery” while cutting “waste, fraud and abuse,” according to a copy of the 16-page draft order obtained by The New York Times. The department is supposed to make the changes by Oct. 1.

    Some of the proposed changes outlined in the draft document would require congressional notification and no doubt be challenged by lawmakers, including mass closures of diplomatic missions and headquarters bureaus, as well as an overhaul of the diplomatic corps. Substantial parts of it, if officials tried to enact them, would likely face lawsuits.

    Elements of the executive order could change before final White House review or before Mr. Trump signs it, if he decides to do so. Neither the State Department nor the White House National Security Council had immediate comment on the draft order early Sunday.

    Secretary of State Marco Rubio wrote a short comment on social media after this article was published calling it “fake news…”

    Major structural changes to the State Department would be accompanied by efforts to lay off both career diplomats, known as foreign service officers, and civil service employees, who usually work in the department’s headquarters in Washington, said current and former U.S. officials familiar with the plans. The department would begin putting large numbers of workers on paid leave and sending out notices of termination, they said.

    The draft executive order calls for ending the foreign service exam for aspiring diplomats, and it lays out new criteria for hiring, including “alignment with the president’s foreign policy vision.”

    The draft says the department must greatly expand its use of artificial intelligence to help draft documents, and to undertake “policy development and review” and “operational planning.”

    The proposed reorganization would get rid of regional bureaus that help make and enact policy in large parts of the globe.

    Instead, the draft says, those functions would fall under four “corps”: Eurasia Corps, consisting of Europe, Russia and Central Asia; Mid-East Corps, consisting of Arab nations, Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan; Latin America Corps, consisting of Central America, South America and the Caribbean; and Indo-Pacific Corps, consisting of East Asia, Southeast Asia, India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan and the Maldives.

    One of the most drastic proposed changes would be eliminating the bureau of African affairs, which oversees policy in sub-Saharan Africa. It would be replaced by a much smaller special envoy office for African affairs that would report to the White House National Security Council. The office would focus on a handful of issues, including “coordinated counterterrorism operations” and “strategic extraction and trade of critical natural resources.”

    The draft also said all “nonessential” embassies and consulates in sub-Saharan Africa would be closed by Oct. 1. Diplomats would be sent to Africa on “targeted, mission-driven deployments,” the document said.

    Canada operations would be put into a new North American affairs office under Mr. Rubio’s authority, and it would be run by a “significantly reduced team,” the draft said. The department would also severely shrink the U.S. embassy in Ottawa.



    Source link

  • More Than 100 Universities Sign Statement Rejecting Trump’s Interference in and Control of Their Campuses

    More Than 100 Universities Sign Statement Rejecting Trump’s Interference in and Control of Their Campuses


    More than 100 universities joined forces to oppose the Trump administration’s efforts to control their curriculum, their hiring policies, and their admissions policies. The initial statement was released this morning and almost another 100 universities signed on.

    The Trump administration’s threat to academic freedom by suspending federal funding and threatening the universities’ tax-exempt status alarmed the universities and spurred them to resist the administration’s unprecedented effort to stifle academic freedom.

    CBS News reported:

    Washington — More than 100 U.S. universities and colleges, including Harvard, Princeton, Penn, Brown, MIT, Cornell and Tufts issued a joint letter Tuesday condemning President Trump’s “political interference” in the nation’s education system. 

    The move comes a day after Harvard University sued the Trump administration, which announced an initial funding freeze of $2.2 billion and later signaled its intention to suspend an additional $1 billion in grants. The moves came after weeks of escalation between the administration and Harvard, which had rejected the administration’s demands to change many of the school’s policies and leadership, including auditing the student body and faculty for “viewpoint diversity.”

    “We speak with one voice against the unprecedented government overreach and political interference now endangering American higher education,” Tuesday’s letter read. 

    “We are open to constructive reform and do not oppose legitimate government oversight. However, we must oppose undue government intrusion,” it said, adding: “We must reject the coercive use of public research funding.” 

    Mr. Trump has sought to bring several prestigious universities to heel over claims they tolerated campus antisemitism, threatening their budgets and tax-exempt status and the enrollment of foreign students.

    The letter said the universities and colleges were committed to serving as centers where “faculty, students, and staff are free to exchange ideas and opinions across a full range of viewpoints without fear of retribution, censorship, or deportation.”

    “Most fundamentally,” the letter reads, “America’s colleges and universities prepare an educated citizenry to sustain our democracy.

    “The price of abridging the defining freedoms of American higher education will be paid by our students and our society. On behalf of our current and future students, and all who work at and benefit from our institutions, we call for constructive engagement that improves our institutions and serves our republic.”

    Reuters reported that other higher education institutions added their names to the statement, which now has nearly 200 signatories.

    The New York Times reported today that some of Harvard’s major donors were urging it to settle with the administration. Eventually, the government’s threats to take control of the university made a settlement impossible.



    Source link

  • How to resist Trump’s order imposing classroom censorship and discrimination 

    How to resist Trump’s order imposing classroom censorship and discrimination 


    The LGBTQ+ community rallies in solidarity, opposing the Social Studies Alive! ban in Temecula Valley Unified in June 2023.

    Credit: Mallika Seshadri / EdSource

    This week’s executive order by President Donald Trump disingenuously titled “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling” is a brazen assault on our educational freedoms and civil rights. The order directs the secretary of education and other department heads to develop a plan to terminate federal funds that directly or indirectly support classroom instruction on systemic racism or provide supportive school services and protections to transgender youth. 

    The order’s sweeping definition of what it calls “discriminatory equity ideology” could lead to a ban on teaching about slavery, segregation, redlining, voter suppression and other historical realities that continue to shape life and opportunity in America today. The order could also result in a ban on ethnic studies, gender studies, queer studies and other rigorous academic disciplines that prepare students to think critically and to live in a multicultural, multiracial society. 

    Equally troubling is the order’s attack on transgender students and the educators who support them. By directing the attorney general and federal prosecutors to coordinate investigations and prosecutions against educators who provide basic support to transgender students, like psychological counseling, or who use the student’s preferred pronouns, the order puts already vulnerable students at grave risk. 

    Put this all together and what results is a stunning proposal for a federal takeover of local education, where the president of the United States dictates what local schools can teach and which type of student belongs in our classrooms. It is also another attempt by President Trump and many of his right-wing supporters to purge our nation’s history of uncomfortable truths and erase the lived experience of people of color, women and members of the LGBTQ+ community.

    While the potential consequences of this order are staggering to imagine, the most effective way to resist it is clear: Schools, educators and communities should not cave in to threats and intimidation and rush to voluntarily comply with this likely unconstitutional and unlawful order. Stay the course, partner with students, families and community organizations, and resist unless and until the courts have authorized any aspect of these outlandish proposals. 

    Trump tried something similar and failed in his last days of his first presidential term by issuing Executive Order 13950, which prohibited federal agencies and grant recipients from conducting trainings that included “divisive concepts” such as systemic racism, white privilege and unconscious bias. The order was blocked by a court in Northern California on First Amendment and Fifth Amendment grounds and later rescinded by the Biden administration. 

    Similar attempts to censor classroom discussion and discriminate against transgender students have also faced legal challenges in states across the country, and most challenges have prevailed. Courts have generally protected local control and academic freedom as essential to democracy and have struck down restrictions on federal funding that essentially coerce states to the point of compulsion. Multiple federal statutes dating back to the founding of the U.S. Department of Education, including the bipartisan-supported Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) in 2015, also prohibit federal officials from controlling specific instructional content or curriculum, and expressly leave such decisions to state and local officials. 

    Even if there are legal setbacks, it will take time, perhaps years, for the courts to resolve these issues. In the meantime, schools have a legal and moral obligation to protect all students and provide an inclusive and honest education. They should stand firm while legal challenges proceed.

    But the fight for educational justice belongs to all of us, not just to lawyers — and it requires a broader movement. Students, parents, educators and community leaders must speak out and stand firm against this dangerous attack on our values. Together, we must continue to make the public case for inclusive education. This includes sharing stories of how discussions of history and identity have transformed our classrooms and our life journeys. Documenting the positive and life-saving impact of supporting LGBTQ+ students. Helping parents understand why preparing diverse teachers to work with students of all backgrounds makes education better for everyone. And importantly, we must document the harm this order would cause to students’ educational experiences. These stories and voices — not just legal arguments in court — will ultimately determine whether we can build schools that truly serve all students.

    In the meantime, stand firm, keep supporting all students and continue teaching truth. 

    •••

    Guillermo Mayer is president and CEO of Public Advocates, a nonprofit law firm and advocacy organization that challenges the systemic causes of poverty and racial discrimination by strengthening community voices in public policy and achieving tangible legal victories advancing education, housing, transportation equity and climate justice.

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





    Source link

  • 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