California state legislators passed a bill Wednesday requiring school districts to ban or restrict student smartphone use on campuses during school hours.
Assembly Bill 3216, renamed the Phone-Free School Act, requires that every school district, charter school and county office of education develop a policy limiting the use of smartphones by July 1, 2026.
“Extended studies have demonstrated that the use of smartphones in classrooms can detract from students’ academic performances while contributing to higher rates of academic dishonesty and cyberbullying,” said the authors’ statement. “In consideration of California’s deficiency when it comes to academic performance, as compared to other states, it is imperative for the legislature to take action to resolve this issue.”
The Phone-Free School Act was authored by a bipartisan group of Assembly members that includes Republican Josh Hoover and Democrats Josh Lowenthal and Al Muratsuchi.
The legislation comes as states, school districts and individual schools are increasingly banning cellphones, smartwatches and other personal devices on campuses in an effort to curb classroom distractions, bullying and addiction to the devices.
At least five other states, including Florida, Indiana, Louisiana, South Carolina and Ohio have similar laws in place.
It is likely that Gov. Gavin Newsom will sign the legislation into law. He sent a letter to school district leaders earlier this month urging them to take immediate action to restrict cellphone use this school year. Excessive smartphone use increases anxiety, depression and other mental health issues in children, he said.
The use of personal devices increased during pandemic school closures, resulting in some students doubling their recreational screen time, according to research. This has led to concerns about addiction to the devices.
This legislation builds on a previous law passed in 2019 that gave school districts the authority, but did not require them, to regulate smartphones during school hours.
Assembly Bill 3216 allows school districts to enforce their cellphone policies by limiting student access to their smartphones. Currently, some schools enforce phone bans by requiring students to check them into “cellphone hotels” or stow them in locked pouches that can only be unlocked by school staff with a special magnet.
Many schools with cellphone prohibitions confiscate phones until the end of the school day if students flout the rules.
The legislation allows for some exemptions. Students will not be prohibited from using their phones if there is an emergency, when they are given permission by school staff, when a doctor says that the student needs the phone for medical reasons or when a smartphone is required in a special education student’s individualized education program.
The legislation also prohibits school officials and staff from accessing or monitoring a student’s online activities.
School districts are required to have “significant stakeholder participation” in developing their cellphone policy to ensure it is responsive to the needs of students, teachers and parents, according to the legislation. The policies must be updated every five years.
Adopting cellphone policies could collectively cost school districts hundreds of thousands of dollars, according to a state analysis of the legislation. Because it is a state mandate, the costs could be reimbursed by the state.
Children complete a grammar worksheet in Spanish at a dual-language immersion program in a Glendale elementary school.
Credit: Lillian Mongeau/EdSource
California published a guide for how districts should serve English learners seven years ago. It’s called the English Learner Roadmap Policy, and it’s largely seen as groundbreaking.
But many districts still haven’t used that road map to change their practices, advocates say.
“It’s not systemic across the state,” said Shelly Spiegel-Coleman, strategic adviser to Californians Together, a coalition of organizations that advocates for English learners. “You can go to school districts and ask teachers, ‘Have you ever heard of the road map?’ And they look at you like you’re from Mars. They’ve never heard of it.”
Lawmakers are now pushing to fully implement the road map, by passing Assembly Bill 2074, introduced by Assemblymembers Al Muratsuchi, D-Torrance, and David Alvarez, D-Chula Vista. If signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, the bill will require the California Department of Education to create a state implementation plan for the English Learner Roadmap with goals and a system to monitor whether those goals are met.
The department will have to first convene an advisory committee, made up of district and county offices of education, teachers, parents of English learners and nonprofit organizations with experience implementing the English Learner Roadmap Policy. The department will have to submit the final implementation plan to the Legislature by Nov. 1, 2026, and begin reporting on which districts, county offices of education and charter schools are implementing the plan by Jan. 1, 2027.
A lack of funding changed the scope of the bill. An earlier version would have also created three positions in the state Department of Education to develop, plan and then support districts to implement the English Learner Roadmap Policy. However, those positions were cut from the bill by the Senate Appropriations Committee due to costs. A separate bill that would have created a grant program to implement the road map, Assembly Bill 2071, failed to pass the Senate Appropriations Committee, because there was no money allocated in the budget.
You can go to school districts and ask teachers, ‘Have you ever heard of the road map?’ And they look at you like you’re from Mars. They’ve never heard of it.
Shelly Spiegel-Coleman, strategic adviser, Californians Together
The California English Learner Roadmap Policy was first approved by the California State Board of Education in 2017 as a guide for school districts, county offices of education and charter schools to better support English learners.
For many, the road map represented a pivotal change in the state’s approach to teaching English learners. It was adopted just months after voters passed Proposition 58 in 2016, which eliminated restrictions on bilingual education put in place by Proposition 227 in 1998. In stark contrast to the English-only policies in place under Proposition 227, the road map emphasizes the importance of bilingual education and bilingualism and of recognizing the assets of students who speak other languages, in addition to emphasizing teaching that “fosters high levels of English proficiency.”
Anya Hurwitz, executive director of SEAL, a nonprofit organization that trains teachers and district leaders and promotes bilingual education, called the English Learner Roadmap a “comprehensive, visionary, research-based policy.”
“It’s aspirational. It’s very much written for a future state, when California can center the student population that is so much at the core of who we are as a state and yet has this history of being treated as an afterthought or a box at the end of a curriculum,” said Hurwitz. “And nonetheless the state needs an implementation plan. Things don’t get done unless we have methodical plans.”
The Legislature has twice created grant programs for districts to get help implementing the English Learner Roadmap Policy. In 2020, the California Department of Education (CDE) awarded $10 million to two grantees, Californians Together and the California Association for Bilingual Education, each of which worked with other organizations, county offices of education and school districts. In 2023, the department awarded another $10 million to four county offices of education, in Sacramento, Los Angeles, San Bernardino and Orange counties.
These programs, however, were optional, and not all districts participated in the training or assistance.
“We feel it’s really necessary for CDE to be very vocal and in the center of stating how important the English Learner Roadmap is, and how important it is to implement,” said Martha Hernandez, executive director of Californians Together. “When CDE says the road map is a priority, it begins to filter down to the districts. But we’re not really hearing that it’s that important from CDE.”
Graciela García-Torres, director of multilingual education for the Sacramento County Office of Education, said the English Learner Roadmap brings her hope, as a former English learner herself and as a parent.
“As a parent, I also see that it supports me in my endeavor to have children that grow up bilingually, knowing their culture and language is just as beautiful and important as English,” García-Torres said.
García-Torres said the Sacramento County Office of Education has worked hard to help districts implement the road map, but a state implementation plan and more funding are needed.
“I’m afraid that without another grant or an implementation plan, it may go back to being pretty words on the page,” García-Torres said.
Debra Duardo, Los Angeles County superintendent of schools, said the English Learner Roadmap has made a big difference in some districts.
“Some of the things I’ve seen changing is the philosophy around English language learners and really moving from this deficit mentality, of ‘these are children who can’t speak English,’ to really celebrating the fact that they’re speaking multiple languages,” said Duardo.
She said having clear goals and requiring districts to report how they’re implementing the plan will be crucial, so that the state can see where districts are struggling and how CDE can help them.
“There are always going to people who feel like this is one more thing that you’re placing on us and it doesn’t come with funding attached to it,” said Duardo. “Districts are struggling. They don’t have their extra pandemic dollars, they didn’t have a very big COLA, and just finding the resources to implement anything can be a challenge.”
Megan Hopkins, professor and chair of UC San Diego’s department of education studies, said many states struggle with implementation of guidance around English learners. She said a statewide plan for implementing the road map is needed, in part because many teachers and administrators don’t think English learner education applies to them.
“English learners are often sort of viewed as separate from, or an add-on, to core instructional programs. I think what happens is people are like, ‘Oh, that’s nice, but it’s not related to what I do over here in math education,’ when in fact it is,” said Hopkins.
Aleyda Barrera-Cruz, executive director for multilingual learner services at the San Mateo-Foster City School District, south of San Francisco, said she has attended professional development sessions on the English Learner Roadmap Policy with EL RISE!, the coalition led by Californians Together, and read through every guidance document they’ve written about the road map.
“Where it gets tricky is sometimes things are written in a way that are not very implementation friendly. They’re written in a very theoretical way like, ‘These are the recommendations,’ so we as districts have to decide what that would look like in our district. There’s a lot of room for interpretation,” Barrera-Cruz said.
She said principals and teachers sometimes interpret the guidelines in different ways at different schools. She would like to see CDE make it very clear how to do things like teaching English language development (teaching English to children who do not know the language), including examples of lesson plans and videos of best practices in the classroom.
“I’m working with a very diverse group of educators. Some have learned this in their teaching credential program; some have not,” Barrera-Cruz said.
Elodia Ortega-Lampkin, superintendent of Woodland Joint Unified School District, near Sacramento, said superintendents and school board members need training to understand why the English Learner Roadmap is needed.
“People watch what you value and the message you send,” Ortega-Lampkin said. “It’s very hard for a principal to do this on their own without the district support. It’s got to come down from the top, including the board.”
She said Woodland Joint Unified required all administrators and teachers to attend training about the English Learner Roadmap. They also have to use the road map when writing their mandatory annual school plans for student achievement.
“It was not an option. It was an expectation. If we have English learners in Woodland and we’re serious about helping them succeed, we need to use a framework that is research-based and provides support for districts. Instead of piecemealing, it’s all in one to help guide those conversations in our schools,” Ortega-Lampkin said.
Before training with the English Learner Roadmap, Ortega-Lampkin said not everyone understood how to teach English language development, often referred to as ELD.
“It was hard to get everyone to buy in and teach ELD. We don’t have that anymore. It’s not a discussion. People just know that ELD needs to happen. I think it’s helped change the mindset and build a better understanding,” Ortega-Lampkin said.
A silent crisis is unfolding in our schools and impacting millions of California students: chronic absenteeism. The consequences of unchecked absenteeism are severe and far-reaching.
It starts innocuously with a few missed days, but can quickly spiral, decimating a child’s future prospects. When dropout rates increase and college readiness declines, the ripple effects harm entire communities.
Traditionally, students and their families are penalized for missing school, but this hasn’t resolved the issue and instead, targets marginalized student groups. As an educator with years of experience in the classroom and administration, I propose a radical shift in our approach — treating chronic absenteeism as a public health emergency.
The rise in social isolation, health concerns and economic hardships have dramatically increased the number of students consistently missing school nationwide. In California, we are seeing consistent, distressing high chronic absence rates, particularly among high school studeents and historically marginalized populations.
We can’t simply discipline our way out of this crisis. Instead, we need a comprehensive strategy that addresses the complex roots of absenteeism, from persistent health issues to limited transportation access, from heightened stress to trauma.
Imagine if schools treated chronic absenteeism with the same urgency and collaboration used during the Covid-19 pandemic. We mobilized resources to fight a global crisis, and we can apply that same level of commitment to ensuring every child attends school regularly.
By framing chronic absenteeism as a public health crisis, we open the door to more effective interventions. One crucial strategy for dealing with public health emergencies is risk communication, which helps convey urgency, provide accurate information, and mobilize stakeholders to take collaborative action. The impact of proactive attendance management has shown to improve attendance rates threefold for chronically absent students.
Here are strategies schools can implement, drawing from public health approaches:
Convey urgency: Research shows attendance is the most crucial predictor of school success. Schools must create a “relentless drumbeat” about the importance of attendance through daily text messages, visual aids, public recognition and personalized follow-ups with absent students.
Provide accurate information: Transparency is key. Schools should share clear data on absenteeism and its effects. Implementing user-friendly attendance management systems can automate positive intervention letters and free up staff for more personalized outreach. Training teachers to analyze attendance data enables early, tailored interventions.
Mobilize stakeholders: Thirty-seven percent of K-12 families want actionable steps to improve their children’s attendance. Schools must provide specific, consistent messaging about attendance importance to all stakeholders — students, families, educators, board members and policymakers. Offer concrete ways for everyone to contribute to the solution.
Advocate for prevention: Positive messaging encourages attendance; punitive actions deter it. A multilevel approach works best:
District level: Superintendents should regularly communicate about the importance of attendance.
Building level: Principals should celebrate good attendance and offer incentives.
Classroom level: Teachers should reach out personally to families, highlighting successes and addressing issues promptly.
Foster two-Way, equitable communication: A Harvard study found that students with the best outcomes for remote learning during the pandemic were in communities with high levels of trust. Schools must establish open dialogues with families in their preferred languages and communication channels. This approach helps identify root causes of absenteeism and builds the trust essential for consistent attendance.
The responsibility for addressing chronic absenteeism extends beyond individual schools or districts — it requires a unified national effort. However, we needn’t wait for a grand solution. By prioritizing consistent, positive communication in our classrooms, schools and communities, we can make significant strides in reducing absenteeism.
Treating chronic absenteeism as a public health emergency isn’t just a metaphor — it’s a call to action. It demands we recognize the severity of the issue and respond with the urgency, coordination and comprehensive strategies that have proven effective in addressing other public health crises.
By reframing our approach, we can foster healthier educational environments and brighter futures for our students, one attendance record at a time.
•••
Kara Stern, Ph.D., is the director of education and engagement at SchoolStatus, a provider of K-12 data-driven communication, attendance and professional development solutions.
The opinions in this commentary are those of the author. We welcome guest commentaries with diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.
For 30 years, California has experimented with a school choice program that let parents enroll their children in nearby districts that opened up seats for outsiders.Now the little-known District of Choice program, which the Legislature has renewed seven times, will become permanent through the passage of Senate Bill 897, authored by Sen. Josh Newman, D-Fullerton, if the governor signs the bill.
Only about 10,000 — about 0.2% — of the state’s students annually have taken advantage of the program. Most attend a half-dozen, primarily small districts in Southern California.
Districts of choice must be open to all who apply, including students with disabilities, who may be more expensive to serve. To prevent wealthier, primarily white families from exiting their home districts, SB 897 adds some stipulations to existing restrictions to prevent racial disparities and financial impacts. After accommodating siblings of transferees, the next priorities will be foster, homeless and low-income children. Up to 1% of students in districts with more than 50,000 students and a maximum 10% of students in districts with fewer than 50,000 will be able to transfer annually. Districts with a negative or qualified financial status can limit the number of students who can leave under the program.
Walnut Valley Unified, a 14,000-student district in the San Gabriel Valley, has been the most active proponent, with 2,774 students –30% of the total –transferring there in 2023-24, likely drawn to its Chinese immersion schools and emphasis on the arts. Pomona Unified, in opposing the bill, argued it lost wealthier families in Diamond Bar, which borders both districts, to the program.
The California Department of Education has not promoted the program, and many neighboring districts appear to have taken a don’t-poach-on-me, I-won’t-tread-on-you approach to interdistrict transfers.
But in an era of declining enrollment, the district of choice program is an option to shore up finances and fill up seats. It’s an open question whether districts will seize the opportunity.
National surveys have determined that parents significantly understate how far behind children are academically because of pandemic learning setbacks. The A’s and B’s that their kids have been getting on their report cards don’t tell the full story, concluded a survey of 2,000 parents .
States’ websites that annually report the scores on standardized tests and other valuable data, like chronic absenteeism, could provide a reality check by clearly and easily displaying performance results over time. However, the California School Dashboard, the public’s primary source for school and district performance data, has failed to do that. The Center on Reinventing Public Education concluded this in the report State Secrets: How Transparent Are State School Report Cards About the Effects of COVID? issued Thursday. California was one of eight states to receive a D grade on an A-F scale, behind the 29 states that did better, including 16 states with an A or B.
The report focused on how states handled longitudinal data — showing changes in results over multiple years — from pre-Covid 2018-19 or earlier to now. In most states, that multiyear look would show a sharp drop on the first testing after the pandemic, followed by a slow recovery that has not made up for lost ground. For California, the decline in 2021-22, following two years of suspended testing, wiped out gradual gains since the first dashboard in 2014-15.
“The (California) dashboard makes it hard to identify longitudinal results,” said Morgan Polikoff, professor of education at the USC Rossier School of Education and the lead author of the report. “Because the dashboard never puts yearly data next to each other; you have to pull up multiple years, download the data, and put the data in Excel or something like that if you want to look at longitudinal trends.”
By contrast, one of seven states to receive an A, Connecticut shows five years of results in bar charts and line graphs for 11 measures.
Connecticut’s dashboard, praised in the report, shows changes over time for multiple performance measures. Source: Connecticut’s Next Generation Accountability Report
“If we had rated states on something else (e.g., how clearly they presented data for the given year), we would have arrived at different ratings,” the report said.
Researchers examined longitudinal data for seven metrics: achievement levels in English language arts, math, science and social studies, achievement growth in English language arts and math, chronic absenteeism, high school graduation rates and English learner proficiency and growth. Teams of evaluators from the center, which is based at Arizona State University, used a point system for each metric based on whether it was easy, somewhat difficult, much too difficult or impossible to find longitudinal data.
“It’s not about having the data — it’s about presenting the data to the public in a way that’s usable,” Polikoff said of California’s dashboard.
California collects the data for five of the seven metrics. It no longer administers a statewide social studies test. It also doesn’t compile achievement growth using students’ specific scores over time, although the state has been considering this approach for more than six years. Instead, it compares scores of this year’s students with different students’ scores in the same grade a year earlier.
Some other states also don’t give a social studies test; California could still have gotten an A grade without it, Polikoff said.
The California Department of Education said that the dashboard undergoes an annual review for refinements to make sure it is “genuinely accessible and useful to our families.”
“We always remain open to the feedback and needs of our families, and we look forward to understanding more about the approach taken by the Center for Reinventing Public Education,” Liz Sanders, director of communications for the department, said in a statement.
She added that School Accountability Report Cards and DataQuest supplement the dashboard and can readily answer questions raised by the Center for Reinventing Public Education. “The dashboard serves a specific purpose to help California’s families understand year-over-year progress at their students’ schools, and the user interface is simplified based on feedback from diverse and representative focus groups of California families,” Sanders said.
Not a priority
At the direction of the State School Board, the California Department of Education chose to focus on disparities in achievement as its top priority for the dashboard. For every school and district, it has made it easy to see how 13 student groups, including low-income students, students with disabilities, English learners, and various racial and ethnic groups performed on multiple measures.
The state developed a rating system using five colors (blue marking the highest performance and red the lowest). Each color reflects the result for the current year combined with the growth or decline from the previous year. The colors send a signal of progress or concern.
However, without reporting longitudinal results for context, the color coding can prove problematic. The statewide chronic absence rate in 2022 was a record high of 30%. Declining 5.7 percentage points in 2023 to 24.3% earned a middle color, yellow signifying neither good nor bad. Yet the chronic absence rate was still at an alarmingly high level. Viewers would have to look closely at the numerical components behind the color to understand that.
No ability to compare schools and districts
Unlike some other states’ dashboards, the California School Dashboard also does not permit comparisons of schools and districts. That was by design. Reflecting the view of former Gov. Jerry Brown, the state board focused on districts’ self-improvement and discouraged facile comparisons that didn’t consider the data behind the colors.
However, both EdSource’s annual alternative dashboard and Ed-Data, a data partnership of the California Department of Education, EdSource, and the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team/California School Information Services, encourage multi-school and district comparisons.
Ed-Data has a five-year comparison of test scores and other metrics. Although this year it no longer starts with 2018-19, the pre-Covid base year for comparisons, viewers can use the year slider above the charts to view data for earlier years.
EdSource has created graphics showing longitudinal statewide results in math and English language arts, including breakouts for student groups, dating to the first year of the Smarter Balanced testing.
“If California had reported all of the outcomes in a format like that, it would’ve gotten an A because that’s exactly the kind of comparison we are looking for,” Polikoff said.
The report separately analyzed the usability of states’ dashboards to determine whether they are easy to use and well-organized. California is one of 16 states rated “fair,” with 23 states rated “great” or “good,” and 11 states, mainly small states like Vermont, but also Texas and New York, rated “poor.”
“We were struck by how difficult it was to navigate some state report card websites,” the report said. “We found many common pitfalls, ranging from the relatively mundane to the massive and structural.”
Kansas, for example, lacked a landing page with overall performance data, while Texas school report cards “offer a wealth of data broken down by every student group imaginable” in massive data tables but no visualizations.
“California’s dashboard is far from the worst out there,” said Polikoff. “The reality is little tweaks are not going to cut it. That probably means a pretty substantial overhaul to be usable for longitudinal comparisons. Now, the state might say, ‘We don’t care about longitudinal trends’ and that’s their prerogative, but what purpose is the dashboard trying to serve, and who’s it trying to serve?”
Answer those questions, he continued, “and then design the dashboard accordingly.”
Faculty, staff and students at four campuses in the Cal State system said they’re starting to feel the impact of belt-tightening in the early weeks of the 2024-25 school year, saying this fall has brought heavier workloads, larger class sizes and fewer course options.
University officials at select campuses acknowledged plans to reduce costs this school year. They said they’ve opened additional course sections where there’s demand and remain committed to supporting students so that they’re on track to graduate, even as they reel in budgets to match shrinking student enrollment on some campuses.
Cal State system officials said in July that the system could experience a $1 billion budget gap in the 2025-26 school year, a forecast driven by uncertain state funding, enrollment declines and rising costs. Trustees said they expect many campus leaders to reduce their overhead this year while also looking for creative ways to raise money going forward.
“It’s extremely difficult to get a hold of the classes that you want and/or need,” said Ashley Gregory, a Cal State LA student who works with the group Students for Quality Education through an internship program funded by the California Faculty Association. “It’s really disheartening.”
Cal State LA
California State University, Los Angeles, which has a $32.4 million deficit, is directing all divisions to cut their budgets by 12.4%.
The university is budgeting with the assumption that enrollment will come in 5.3% below the target for in-state full-time equivalent students it receives from the Cal State system, the school’s interim chief financial officer, Claudio Lindow, wrote in a Thursday email to the campus. Lindlow said there are signs that actual enrollment will reduce that gap.
Gregory said she’s already feeling the consequences of budget cuts on her major and minor fields — history, Pan-African studies and Latin American studies.
“I’m constantly having conversations with other students regarding, ‘Oh, this class is no longer available. This professor is no longer here,’” Gregory said.
A university dashboard showing enrollments by course lists fewer total courses in each of Gregory’s three departments this fall compared with the same time last year. In the history department, enrollment was down from more than 1,800 students in fall 2023 to fewer than 1,700 students this semester.
Juan Lamata, the faculty mentor to Students for Quality Education and a member of the California Faculty Association Los Angeles Executive Board, said he’s observed fewer electives in the English department, leaving a more narrow range of classes available to students.
“We’re changing what an English major means at Cal State LA, because now students will not have the opportunity to take classes in things they’re interested in or things that they don’t know they’re interested in,” he said. “We’re reducing what they can even be curious about.”
Cal State LA spokesperson Erik Frost Hollins could not confirm whether the number of courses offered by the university has declined but said course sections are down almost 7% compared with last year. The universityis not experiencing longer waitlists for fall courses as a result, according to Lindow’s email, but rather has lower waitlist numbers than in the past.
Cal State LA has gone from overenrolling students in excess of the target it receives from the Chancellor’s Office to experiencing an enrollment decline post-pandemic, President Berenecea Johnson Eanes wrote in a July letter to the campus.
Each condition strained the campus in different ways, Eanes wrote. When it was overenrolled, the university absorbed the costs of additional students without receiving additional state funding, she explained, which “had an adverse impact on the experience we can provide students.” But declining enrollment “feels like a budget reduction, because of the lost tuition, even though our funding per student is up,” she added.
“The greater risk lies in falling below enrollment targets, losing both tuition and state/system support,” Eames wrote. “This is why we need to focus on reversing enrollment declines and push to meet our enrollment target every year.”
Cal State LA headcount enrollment in fall 2023 was 24,673, up 6% compared with a decade ago, but below a pre-pandemic peak of 28,253.
Cal State East Bay
Another Cal State campus is reckoning with how to make sure it offers the courses students need while adjusting to a yearslong slide in enrollment.
Cal State East Bay enrollment has fallen almost 26% from its peak in 2016 to fall 2023. Explaining a decision to cut staff and administrator positions last year, officials said the university had not fully adjusted its budget to match those declines and also anticipated that its health insurance, utilities and benefits costs would rise, contributing to a structural deficit. President Cathy Sandeen, in a July message to the campus, said the school “must continue to explore all means to further reduce our expenses.”
A longtime faculty member said she worries that in trying to reduce overhead, the university is cutting instruction unnecessarily.Jennifer Eagan, a professor at the campus since 1999,said the university deferred dozens of eligible applicants to its Master of Public Administration degree program rather than expand the program to accommodate them this year.
“We have enrollments that we could be capturing, like classes we could be filling, cohorts of master’s programs that could be underway,” said Eagan, who served as the statewide president of the California Faculty Association from 2015 to 2019. “But the enrollments now are being artificially depressed, in my view.”
Cal State East Bay’s instruction expenses fell 11% from 2021-22 into 2022-23, according to the university’s two most-recent financial statements, tracking a year-over-year decline in enrollment.
Cal State East Bay spokesperson Kimberly Hawkins said in a statement that the university is “navigating a period of lower enrollment with a continued commitment to meeting students’ needs through strategic course offerings.” Hawkins said that, though there’s been a slight increase in waitlists to get into classes, the university has opened additional sections for certain courses. “Even as enrollment trends shift, our focus remains squarely on providing our students with timely offerings that fulfill their degree objectives,” she said.
Rin Anderson, a Cal State East Bay student interning for Students for Quality Education, said they see signs of tight budgets outside of academics, too. They said the university’s Student Equity and Success Center, which provides counseling for students from historically underrepresented communities, is underfunded and understaffed.
“The people that work for the university, who are in charge of these affinity programs, they’re overworked,” Anderson said. “They have so many different responsibilities and hats to wear.”
CSU Monterey Bay students move into campus dorms in August 2021.Credit: Monterey Bay/Flickr
Cal State Monterey Bay
After a pandemic-era slump, Cal State Monterey Bay’s enrollment is showing signs of recovery.
The Central Coast campus saw a 15.6% increasein enrollment this semester compared with fall 2023 — an increase so big that the Monterey Herald reportedthe school is moving students into staff housing and modifying some dorms to fit an extra student in an effort to whittle down its waitlist for housing.
But Monterey Bay has also reduced its budget. A university official said in a statement the campus opted to trim costs at the beginning of this fiscal year to balance its budget and doesn’t anticipate any additional cuts later in 2024-25.
Meghan O’Donnell, a history lecturer at Cal State Monterey Bay and co-president of the school’s California Faculty Association chapter, said her department has lost seven faculty members; some departed through a voluntary separation program last spring, and others left because of frustration with lack of resources. She said the department hasn’t hired replacements.
“There’s just a lot of challenges losing that level of faculty, while also being told we have to do all of the same work, if not more, because now we actually have more students than we were anticipating having this fall,” she said.
O’Donnell is concerned that larger class sizes on her campus would make it harder for colleagues to incorporate experiential and one-on-one learning techniques into their courses — the kind of practices she said are especially effective for first generation students.
In a statement, CSUMB Provost Andrew Lawson said the university has a lower student-faculty ratio than other CSU campuses and remains “committed to providing strong mentorship and experiential learning opportunities to our students.” He said the Monterey Bay campus has added additional course sections to accommodate incoming students, including in general education courses for first-year students. The university’s colleges of science and business experienced the steepest enrollment increases.
Cal State Monterey Bay is also implementing what it calls an “incentive-based budget model,” which allocates funding to each of its colleges based partially on enrollment. Budget cuts last year impacted colleges with deeper enrollment declines more than those where enrollment was steady or dipped more modestly, Lawson said.
O’Donnell said that model is starving the budgets of departments like Spanish, ethnic studies and history.
Students “are being told that their desires don’t matter as much, basically, unless they’re in a major that’s actively growing based on market demand,” she said.
Cal Maritime is the smallest campus in the California State University system.Credit: Cal Maritime / Flickr
Cal Maritime
It’s not just faculty that are feeling the squeeze.
Cal Maritime, the smallest Cal State campus, has laid off 10 staff members, a university spokesperson confirmed. Sianna Brito, the president of the university’s chapter of the California State University Employees Union (CSUEU), said the Aug. 20 layoffs affected eight CSUEU members and two managers.
Declining enrollment and financial pressure have set Cal Maritime on a path to a possible merger with Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, a much larger campus 250 miles south of the current campus in Vallejo. The Cal State board of trustees opened discussions on the proposal to combine the two schools at its July meeting. It will weigh additional updates in September before voting on the plan in November.
Cal Maritime interim President Michael Dumont wrote in an Aug. 20 email to the campus that “enrollment challenges, state budget cuts, increased utility and insurance costs, and unfunded compensation costs” had left the university of 761 students with a combined $3.1 million deficit across its general operating and housing funds. He said the lack of funds “allowed us no other options” but to reduce staffing this year.
“I ask that each member of our community remember that we are being forced to do less with less, and we will need to exhibit grace and practice patience with one another as we continue assessing our operations and as we approach the integration recommendation decision,” he wrote. “We need to be clear eyed and realize that what we have been able to support or accommodate in the past may not be able to occur this year.”
Brito was among the staff who lost jobs. She said the layoff was unusually abrupt, blindsiding the managers to whom she reports and leaving no time to plan for colleagues to take over her responsibilities, which include the logistical and fiscal work behind the school’s faculty development and study abroad programs.
“We immediately had to turn in our business cards, our keys. We were locked out of our emails. We had to turn in laptops, and we were escorted off campus immediately upon being notified that we were laid off,” she said.
That was a shift from past layoffs, Brito said, in which departing employees continued working until their layoff date and were celebrated in campuswide emails. This time around, she said, Brito and her colleagues will be paid out until their official layoff date in October, but they ceased working the same day they were notified.
There could also be implications for students. Part of Brito’s job had been the fiscal processing that allows Cal Maritime students who aren’t studying for a Coast Guard license to study abroad.
“Now my job is parceled out to people who don’t have the institutional knowledge of the program,” she said. “So I personally feel like our students are not going to get the best experience with me not supporting that program.”
This story has been updated to reflect that only Cal State Monterey Bay is using the incentive-based budget model.
California’s 1.6 million high school students are starting another year, but without a critical school supply that I would argue is necessary for teens: condoms.
Why should California public high schools be required to provide condoms to students? Because condom availability programs are an effective public health strategy supported by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to help keep sexually active high school students safe. According to the CDC:
This year, the Golden State has a golden opportunity to protect high school students in California from alarming statistics like these in the form of the YHES Act.
The Youth Health Equity + Safety (YHES) Act (SB 954) would expand access to condoms by requiring public and charter high schools to make free condoms readily available to students, giving them the opportunity to protect themselves from STIs that negatively impact their well-being, shorten their lifespan and easily spread to the wider community.
The organization I lead, the California School-Based Health Alliance (CSHA), helps improve health access and equity by supporting schools and health care partners to bring health services to where the kids are — at school. The alliance is a proud co-sponsor of this bill because providing condoms in California’s high schools equips young people to make healthier decisions if they choose to be sexually active.
Although some districts, such as Los Angeles Unified, San Francisco Unified and Oakland Unified, already offer condom access programs, the majority of schools in California do not.
An online survey by TeenSource, an initiative of Essential Access Health, found that 68% of California teens lack access to condoms at their high school, and 98% agreed that easier access would increase condom use among sexually active teens.
SB 954 would require all public and charter high schools to make internal and external condoms readily available to students for free beginning at the start of the 2025-26 school year. Condoms would need to be placed in a minimum of two locations on school grounds where they are easily accessible to students during school hours without requiring assistance or permission from school staff.
California’s high school students have a right to consent to and access medically accurate, confidential, culturally relevant, and age-appropriate health services in schools. Our state has made great strides in reducing unintended pregnancy among adolescents in the past 20 years. Unfortunately, half of all reported cases of STIs in 2022 were among young people aged 15-24. The scope of the epidemic requires bold action.
This year marks the second time state Sen. Caroline Menjivar, D-Van Nuys, has moved this sensible bill through the state’s Legislature. Menjivar has secured $5 million to cover the costs of distributing free condoms in public high schools for three years. The bill also specifies that if funds are not designated for this purpose, schools have no obligation to provide free condoms — addressing any concern as to an unfunded mandate.
To reduce public health disparities, we must ensure that California youth have equitable access to condoms in high schools. Advocates for youth health and education equity urge Gov. Gavin Newsom to sign the YHES Act into law.
•••
Sergio J. Morales, MPA, is the executive director of the California School-Based Health Alliance (CSHA), a nonprofit organization that aims to improve the health and academic success of children and youth by advancing health services in schools.
The opinions in this commentary are those of the author. We welcome guest commentaries with diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.
Krystle Pale, UC Santa Cruz graduate and advisory committee member of The California Alliance for Student Parent Success, with her family. She provided testimony for AB 2458 and also successfully advocated for her children to walk with her on stage during graduation.
Credit: Photo by Nikhil Naidu Photography / Courtesy California Competes
About 1 in 8 college students in California is a parent. For these students, college isn’t just about attending class and studying; it’s a daily juggling act that also includes managing households, raising children, and working to stay afloat. Moreover, the additional costs of child care, higher food expenses, and other necessities mean that student parents pay an additional $7,500 per child to attend college. Without significant financial aid, they would need to work at least 50 hours per week at minimum wage to cover these costs.
The precarious balancing act is more than a personal challenge — it’s a consequential issue that spans generations and affects all Californians. When student parents thrive, the benefits ripple across communities and generations, creating economic stability for families, closing racial equity gaps, and strengthening California’s workforce and economy. Yet, their determination to balance work, study and parenting goes largely unnoticed because neither colleges nor the state systematically collects data on their demographics, experiences and outcomes.
This Student Parent Month, we urge higher education leaders, policymakers and communities to change that. To empower bright futures for all Californians and bolster the state’s economy, which increasingly relies on a skilled workforce, California must transform the higher education system to address the needs of student parents and smooth the path to college for the 3.9 million Californians with children who have yet to complete their degrees. And it all starts with better data.
Think of data both as a flashlight and a key. As a flashlight, data illuminates the needs and strengths of student parents, allowing colleges to identify the obstacles they face and the support they need to succeed. As a key, data unlocks a deeper understanding of who California’s student parents are, enabling more informed decision-making and resource allocation to improve outcomes for them and their families.
Right now, California cannot effectively use student parent data in these ways. Only some campuses collect data on student parents and the several that do miss critical data points, such as the number and ages of students’ children, which would be helpful for assessing the need for child care and family-serving housing. Definitions of “student parent” vary between institutions, and within colleges, departments struggle to coordinate data collection efforts, further limiting their ability to leverage data to drive systemic change for student parents.
Accessible means that colleges should facilitate information-sharing between campus departments, across colleges, and external sectors like workforce and social services, and share de-identified data publicly.
Accurate means that colleges and government agencies should establish standardized data collection definitions and procedures statewide.
Actionable means that the data can be effectively analyzed and responds to the needs of student parents. Data should be collected about the experiences of student parents from enrollment through career, their academic and workforce outcomes, and data disaggregated by key demographics, like race, ethnicity and gender.
California has work to do, but progress is on the horizon, especially with the development of stronger data infrastructure through the California Cradle-to-Career Data system.
Legislation to strengthen data collection for student parents is also underway. This year, our alliance cosponsored its first bill, the GAINS for Student Parents Act (AB 2458), which will require institutions to uniformly collect and report data on student parents and share this data with the Office of Cradle-to-Career Data. This will enable California to evaluate and shape policies and practices that will empower student parents to reach their full potential. The bill also seeks to make college more affordable, addressing financial hurdles student parents face. Now, all that remains is the governor’s signature to make this bill law.
Addressing data gaps will enable California to better tailor resources and policies, streamlining student parents’ educational and career journeys and laying the foundation for a thriving economy. This Student Parent Month, let’s honor their determination to work, study and parent by taking concrete steps to advance their success. Passing legislation like GAINS for Student Parents Act is one critical step. It’s time for California to unite in uplifting the voices and future of student parents and, by extension, the future of California.
•••
Su Jin Jez, Ph.D., is CEO of California Competes, a nonpartisan policy and research organization focused on identifying solutions to California’s higher education and workforce issues.
Christopher J. Nellum, Ph.D., is executive director of EdTrust-West, a nonprofit organization advancing policies and practices to dismantle the racial and economic barriers embedded in the California education system.
The opinions in this commentary are those of the author. We welcome guest commentaries with diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.
School is back in session. In California, we ended the prior school year with promising data that student attendance rates throughout the state are rising from historic lows during the pandemic. While having students in seats is cause for celebration, we must ensure that we have enough teachers in classrooms.
The initiative we should be champing at the bit to implement is high-impact tutoring: tutoring in one-on-one situations or very small groups meeting at least 30 minutes, three or more times a week. Here’s why this is an effective, scalable way to provide students with high-quality educators:
You can’t argue with data. Research shows that high-dosage tutoring is one of the most effective ways to help students make academic progress. Yet few students actually receive it. A recent study from Stanford University demonstrated the many positive effects of tutoring, including increased reading and math scores, attendance and a feeling of belonging. Teach For America’s (TFA) tutoring program, the Ignite Fellowship, finds and develops tutors who connect virtually with students during the school day. Fellows, who are paid for their work, are supported by a school-based veteran educator to customize instruction. Seventy-one percent of the 3,500 students across the country being tutored by Ignite fellows meet their semester-long reading and math goals.
Tutoring is a pipeline to teaching. Teacher morale is an ongoing issue. Because teaching is so unique, it can be hard to fully prepare aspiring educators for what it’s like to lead a classroom. Tutoring serves as a way for college students to step behind the wheel, with a professional providing roadside assistance before they are given full control. This can be key to teacher recruitment and retention — before people fully enlist in becoming a teacher, they have the opportunity to see if this profession is right for them. AmeriCorps, which also invests in employing young people as tutors to help them jump-start service-oriented careers, has found that more than half of its tutors hope to pursue a career in education after their service. When teachers are more confident stepping into their classrooms, students are the ones who reap the rewards.
Tutors ease the burden for teachers. Tutors can focus on small groups or individual sessions with students — something that lead teachers don’t always have the capacity to do. This way, tutors can address specific learning gaps for individual students, meeting more individual and diverse needs, and allowing students to build authentic relationships with multiple educators/mentors. I have had teachers tell me they wish they could clone themselves so they could work with more students to meet different needs and speeds. In our reality, tutors may be the closest thing we have to clones.
Prioritizing diversity. To provide a diverse experience for our nation’s students, we must have their educators — their role models — reflect them. This means we should prioritize recruiting and retaining teachers of color. Throughout California’s public schools, 77% of the K-12 population is composed of students of color, whereas only 37% of educators identify as people of color. This kind of ratio is true for Los Angeles, where I am based. That’s why I’m excited to be welcoming the Ignite Fellowship to schools throughout Los Angeles (and expanding even further throughout California) this year, helping bring more diverse and locally rooted teachers into classrooms. People of color face historically more hurdles than white people in the workforce, and this is even more extreme in the teaching profession. Tutoring is a way to expand the diversity of the teacher pipeline and can increase students’ access to educators from diverse backgrounds. Virtual programs like Ignite also allow for more flexibility and accessibility, meaning fewer hurdles for aspiring teachers to become tutors, and more opportunities for students to connect with tutors and mentors.
The school year may already be underway, but the reality is that schools will be fighting to staff their classrooms all year. Anything we can do to mitigate the detrimental effects that understaffed schools have on students should be a priority. Investing in tutors is an actionable way to help staff schools with diverse educators, with an added benefit of creating a pipeline of tomorrow’s teachers.
We have the proof that it will help our students, so what are we waiting for?
•••
Lida Jennings is the executive director of Teach For America Los Angeles and San Diego.
The opinions in this commentary are those of the author. We welcome guest commentaries with diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.
Making Waves Academy, a charter school in Richmond, tries to instill a college-pursuing attitude while leaving room for kids to enter a career after graduation if they wish.
Courtesy: Making Waves Academy
There is a troubling trend in California that makes affordable and quality higher education — which is meant to be a public good — not even an option for most students, particularly Black and Latino students. It’s the inequity of students completing the “A-G” courses required for admission to the University of California and California State University systems. More than half of all students, and over two-thirds of Black and Latino students, did not meet these requirements — too often because the courses were not offered or the students didn’t know they were needed. This means they are ineligible for admission into California’s public universities.
As CEO of a grade 5-12 charter school in Richmond, I believe the A-G requirements should be seen as an asset rather than an obstacle for California schools. The requirements are transparent and attainable. They help prepare students academically, support eligibility for California’s public universities, and open up a variety of opportunities for students’ future career pathways. Ultimately, this helps alleviate inequities in education, the workforce and the economy.
At our school, our goal is that 100% of our students are ready for college while also embracing, supporting and celebrating students who want to pursue early post-secondary career options. Within the Class of 2024, 95% of our graduates are pursuing higher education, and within that group, 71% are planning to attend University of California or California State Universities campuses. Among our 1,000 or so fifth through 12th graders, 99% are students of color, and 85% are from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds.
Here is how school and district leaders can build a culture around supporting students in meeting the A-G requirements.
Align your curriculum to the A-G requirements
Students don’t know what they don’t know. And they don’t always know there are specific course requirements to be eligible to attend public universities. It is our responsibility as school leaders and systems to align our curriculum to the A-G requirements and remove that burden on individual students.
The good news is that this is not a very heavy lift. In California, students are already required to take a variation of core academic subjects listed within the A-G requirements, such as English, history, science and math. Making sure students are taking a lab science class, a third year of a world language, or a math up to Algebra II are small but meaningful adjustments to their course schedules that would help more students meet the A-G requirements, thus meeting eligibility requirements for UC and CSU campuses.
Get creative to track individual students
For every college and career counselor in California, there are 464 students. It’s no wonder 56% of California students experience barriers to meeting the requirements. Instead of relying solely on counselors, make the most of advisory period. Advisory period teachers can reinforce college readiness and help track individual students’ progress on the A-G requirements. Our advisory teachers track the same cohort of students from ninth through 12th grade. With this support, students can also practice their agency by being actively involved in mapping out their courses and paying attention to their post-graduation plans, which serves them well whether they ultimately pursue college or not.
Be inclusive of non-college-going students
It is important to note that a culture that embraces the A-G requirements and college readiness and a culture that embraces a continuum of college and career options can and should live side by side. It is a both/and approach not an either/or approach. Allow for both. When you align to the A-G requirements, you ensure that students meet the “floor” for college eligibility. Build further understanding with students on the continuum of attainable pathways. For example, the A-G requirements can also align with career technical education, which integrates core academic courses with technical and occupational ones. This way, students can explore career interests and still remain eligible for college. Knowing the range of options available means students can choose what’s best for them.
Communicate early and often with parents and families
California has some of the world’s best and most affordable opportunities for higher education. Tragically, many students and families don’t know these opportunities are attainable. The importance of the A-G requirements and information around college affordability must be communicated to students and families early and often. Ideally, regular updates and information sessions start with students and families in middle school. For example, we set clear expectations with students and families at fifth grade orientation. We talk to them about the A-G requirements being built into our curriculum and about our school culture around college readiness. Time and time again, we see ecstatic students and families when they realize college is accessible and attainable.
It’s our responsibility as school leaders or school systems to provide the necessary courses and support to bridge the inequities between high school to college and careers. The logistical challenges are surely outweighed by the opportunities: more racial representation in higher education, an increase in economic mobility for students from low-income backgrounds, and a more diverse and educated workforce.
•••
Alton B. Nelson Jr. is the CEO of Making Waves Academy in the Bay Area city of Richmond.
The opinions in this commentary are those of the author. We welcome guest commentaries with diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.
