اینترنت

برچسب: could

  • A guide to what a $10 billion construction bond on the ballot could mean for your school

    A guide to what a $10 billion construction bond on the ballot could mean for your school


    West Contra Costa Unified’s Stege Elementary School in Richmond.

    Credit: Andrew Reed / EdSource

    More than 1 in 4 school districts are asking local voters to approve a record $39 billion in school construction bonds on the Nov. 5 ballot. Those that pass will jockey for some of the $10 billion in matching state funding that Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature are asking voters to approve by passing Proposition 2.

    The facility needs of districts are huge and growing, even as the state’s overall enrollment is projected to decline over the next two decades.

    Decades-old “portable” classrooms are falling apart; many air conditioners are malfunctioning, and classrooms without them are sweltering. Roofs leak, plumbing is corroding, wiring is fraying. 

    Parents worry about open access to insecure campuses. Schools lack room for new transitional kindergarten classes and plans for climate-resilient, energy-efficient buildings. Increasingly popular career and vocational education programs need up-to-date spaces.

    Districts’ priorities will vary, and so will their capacity to pay for them. As in the past, districts with high property values, which often correlate to higher-than-average incomes of homeowners, will have a leg up on their property-poor neighbors in terms of what they can ask their taxpayers to approve. Some districts will check off items on their wish list; other districts will resort to triage, fixing what’s most falling apart.

    In March 2020, amid first reports of a new pandemic on the horizon, statewide voters defeated a state construction bond with an unlucky ballot number. As a result, the state fell further behind in helping districts repair and rebuild school facilities.

    “The defeat of Proposition 13 in 2020 and the pandemic made local districts more hesitant to put bonds on the ballot in 2022, so there is a lot of pent-up need,” said Sara Hinkley, California program manager for the Center for Cities + Schools at UC Berkeley, which has extensively analyzed facilities needs in the state. 

    “The number of bond measures and the total amount reflect the aging and deferred maintenance of California schools, as well as the increasing urgency of HVAC and schoolyard upgrades to grapple with extreme heat.”

    The center estimates that 85% of classrooms in California are more than 25 years old; 30% are between 50 and 70 years old, and about 10% are 70 years old or older.

    Proposition 2 won’t significantly reform a first-come, first-served funding system if it passes, but it will clear out a backlog of unfunded school projects and partially replenish a state-building fund that has run dry.

    With so much on the ballot competing for attention, Proposition 2 may escape many voters’ attention. Here are answers to questions that should help you fill out your ballot.  

    What’s on the ballot this year?

    School districts have placed 252 bond proposals to raise $39.3 billion; 15 community college districts are asking voters to pass $10.6 billion worth of bonds, for a total of 267 proposed bonds valued at $49.9 billion. They range from a proposed $9 billion bond issue in Los Angeles, the state’s largest district, to $3 million sought by Pleasant View Elementary School District for repairs to its only school in Porterville.

    How is school construction funded?

    Unlike school districts’ operating money, which mostly comes from the state’s general fund, school construction and repairs remain largely a local responsibility, paid for by bonds funded by property taxes. Over the past 20 years, voters approved $181 billion in local bonds for public school and community college facility projects, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.  

    That compares with $31.8 billion over the same period in state facilities bonds passed for school district and community college construction, plus $4.6 billion from the general fund that Gov. Gavin Newsom directed toward school construction. Altogether, the state has chosen to bear only 17% — one-sixth — of the total costs of school construction since 2001.

    Bonds are essentially loans that are paid back, commonly over 25 or 30 years, with interest. In the past 10 years, interest rates have ranged from about 2% to nearly 5% and now are coming down again. The Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates it would cost the general fund about $500 million annually for 35 years to pay back Proposition 2’s principal and interest.

    What does it take to pass a bond?

    The passage of a local bond requires a 55% approval rate. Despite the higher threshold than a simple majority, voters have approved 80% of local bonds on the ballot since 2001, according to CaliforniaFinance.com. The exception was in 2020, when voters defeated about half of local bonds, along with Proposition 13. The passage rate bounced back in 2022 to 72% — perhaps a good omen for proposals on Nov. 5 . 

    It takes only a 50% majority to pass a state construction bond. A voter survey in September by the Public Policy Institute of California found that 54% of likely voters said they would vote yes on Proposition 2, with 44% voting no.

    The bulk of state funding for school and community college construction came in the early 2000s, during fast-growing enrollment and boom years for the state economy. However, the state issued no state bonds for a decade after 2006. The 2016 bond, Proposition 51, the last that voters approved, allocated $7 billion for K-12 and $2 billion for the state’s 115 community colleges. All of that funding has been distributed. 

    Are there limits to how much districts can tax property owners for school bonds?

    Yes. Property taxes from school construction are capped at $60 per $100,000 of assessed valuation for unified districts, $30 per $100,000 for elementary or high school districts, and $25 per $100,000 for community college districts. A person whose home assessed value is at $400,000 (often significantly less than the market value) could pay up to $240 in annual property taxes in a unified district to pay off bonds’ principal and interest. Districts will stretch out the timeline for projects to stay under the limit.

    How will Proposition 2 be divvied up?

    The $10 billion will split:

    • $1.5 billion for community colleges
    • $8.5 billion for TK-12 districts, allocated as follows:
      • $4 billion for repairs, replacement of portables at least 20 years old, and other modernization work
      • $3.3 billion for new construction
      • $600 million for facilities for career and technical education programs
      • $600 million for facilities for charter schools
      • $115 million set aside to remove lead in school water

    Will all of this money go toward new projects?

    No. 

    Unfunded projects left over from Prop. 51 in 2016 that are deemed eligible for funding will go to the front of the line. That’s how the system worked in the past when there wasn’t enough money to go around, and the Legislature applied the same language to Prop. 2. The rationale is that districts spent time and money hiring architects and engineers and drawing up plans, and shouldn’t be penalized for efforts done in good faith.

    Those existing projects could consume half of the $8.5 billion for TK-12 funding. As of Aug. 31, the Office of Public Instruction, which tracks projects for funding, reported 1,000 school projects requesting $3.9 billion were already in line, with requests dating back to 2022. These break down to 812 modernization projects potentially eligible for $2.6 billion and 189 new construction projects eligible for $1.3 billion. The deadline for school districts to apply is Oct. 31, so the list may yet grow. 

    The Office of Public Construction cautioned that although the districts have filed paperwork, they have not been evaluated and approved for funding by the State Allocation Board under the rules in effect for Proposition 51. Some may have been built with local funding and are waiting for a state match.

    With $40 billion in local projects on the ballot and probably a net of $4 billion available for modernization and new construction, there likely will not be enough to fund more than a portion, leading to the establishment of a new list of unfunded projects.

    How does the match work?

    The state awards matching money to districts to defray the qualifying cost of individual school projects; it does not provide a lump sum award for all of the districts’ requests.  The state pays a uniform amount per student based on a school’s enrollment. Districts with growing enrollment, buildings over 75 years old, and a shortage of space can receive funding for new construction. 

    As with past state bonds, the state will split the cost of new construction; the state will contribute a higher match for modernization projects — 60% by the state and 40% by the district.

    A new feature in Proposition 2 will provide a slightly larger state match — up to an additional 5 percentage points on a sliding scale system to districts with both high rates of low-income students, foster children and English learners, and, to a lesser extent, with a small bonding capacity per student, another measure of ability to issue construction bonds. Low-income districts like Fresno Unified and Los Angeles Unified will be eligible for 65% state assistance for renovations and 55% for new construction, lowering their share to 35% and 45%, respectively.

    Is the formula fair?

    Analyses by the Public Policy Institute of California and the Center for Cities + Schools at UC Berkeley have concluded that the current system favors property-wealthy districts. Property-poor districts serving low-income families can’t afford bonds to qualify for state modernization subsidies to repair and upgrade schools. 

    The center’s data showed that the quintile of districts with the lowest assessed property value — those with a median of $798,000 of assessed value per student — received $2,970 per student in state modernization funding from 2000 to 2023, while the districts in the highest quintile, where the median assessed property value was $2.3 million per student, received $7,910 per student — more than two-and-a-half times as much. 

    Another factor is that matching money is distributed first-come, first-served, which favors large districts and small property-wealthy districts with an in-house staff of architects and project managers adept at navigating complex funding requirements.

    Does Proposition 2 address these complaints?

    To an extent, yes.

    • Proposition 2 would dedicate 10% of new funding for modernization and new construction to small districts, defined as those with fewer than 2,501 students. First-come, first-served wouldn’t apply to them.
    • Proposition 2 would expand financial hardship assistance in which the state pays for the total cost of projects in districts whose tax bases are too low to issue a bond. Eligibility would triple the threshold for hardship aid from a maximum of $5 million to $15 million in total assessed value; additional dozens of mostly rural districts would become eligible. Some have never issued a bond to fix schools that urgently need attention. Since 1998, about 3% of state bond money has been spent on hardship aid.
    • The higher state match for districts with large proportions of low-income students and English learners is a step toward addressing inequalities. However, critics led by the public interest law firm Public Advocates charge that it does not go far enough and uses flawed measures. Districts like 3,500-student Del Norte in the far north of the state  and 46,000-student San Bernardino Unified in Southern California would need an 80% to 90% state match to raise enough money to fix critical conditions and add facilities that property-wealthy districts take for granted, they argue.

    What else is new in Proposition 2?

    The bond will allow districts to seek a supplemental grant to construct or renovate transitional kindergarten classrooms and build gyms, all-purpose rooms, or kitchens in schools that lack them.

    Districts must write an overall plan documenting the age and uses of all facilities when submitting a proposal for Prop. 2 funding. The lack of data has made it difficult to determine building needs statewide.

    What would happen if Proposition 2 is defeated?

    In the last 30 years, voters have nixed state construction bonds twice, but never twice in a row. If voters do that next month, the unmet building needs of districts struggling to address them will mount. The price to fix them will rise, forcing difficult choices on how to scale back and reorder priorities.

    The $9 billion bond issue passed in 2016 would cost $11.8 billion to cover the same work in 2024, 31% more, according to a U.S. inflation calculator. A $10 billion bond passed in 2002 would require $17.5 billon in funding today.

    The escalation in materials and labor costs since the pandemic may continue to soar — or maybe not. Voters on Prop. 2 will have to decide whether to take that gamble.

    “We believe that voters will understand the value of making the critical repairs and classroom upgrades that our students need and deserve,“ said Rebekah Kalleen, legislative advocate for the Coalition for Adequate School Housing or CASH, the lobby representing school districts and school construction contractors campaigning for Prop. 2.





    Source link

  • Understanding California’s test scores could hold the key to student improvement

    Understanding California’s test scores could hold the key to student improvement


    Credit: Alison Yin/EdSource

    As states across the nation release their annual data from tests administered to students in the 2023-24 school year, we’re beginning to get a clearer picture of how far along we are in our post-pandemic recovery. The release of California test data today shows our public schools are continuing to turn the corner on pandemic recovery, with gains on most assessments, while highlighting areas where we have more work to do.

    Overall, the percentages of California students meeting or exceeding the proficiency standards for English language arts (ELA), mathematics, and science increased. This is encouraging given that the population of socioeconomically disadvantaged students tested increased again over the past year — as it has for each of the last three years — this time from 63% to 65% — an increase of more than 60,000 students. The number of students experiencing homelessness also rose once again. Despite the challenges they face, achievement levels for socioeconomically disadvantaged students increased more than the statewide average in all three subjects at every grade level. 

    Furthermore, Black and Latino students showed positive score trends in mathematics across all grades, and the stubborn achievement gaps long experienced by Black students began to close with gains larger than the statewide averages in math and ELA at several grade levels. The same was true for foster youth.

    These gains for California’s most vulnerable students are likely due in large part to the investments made by Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration and efforts to target inequities in life circumstances and educational opportunities. These include programs like the California community schools initiative that provides wraparound whole child supports, the expanded learning opportunities program (ELO-P) that provides academic support and enrichment after school and over the summer, the literacy coaching initiative, and the equity multiplier — all targeted to high-poverty schools. Attracting and keeping better prepared teachers in these schools has also been enabled by the Golden State Teacher Grants for new teachers and incentives for accomplished veterans who are National Board certified. 

    It is encouraging that overall scores are up, but there is more work needed. And an accurate understanding of what’s being measured and what the scores mean is critically important for diagnosing and improving student learning.

    Smarter Balanced assessments are administered in California and 11 other states and territories that helped develop the tests. California’s Smarter Balanced assessments are more rigorous than those in most other states as they focus on higher-order skills and critical thinking, and measure more standards.

    For example, whereas most states’ English language arts assessments test only reading and use only multiple-choice questions, California’s tests include reading, writing, listening, and even research, as well as open-ended questions and performance tasks that require students to analyze multiple sources of evidence and explain their conclusions.

    Each Smarter Balanced assessment measures grade-level content along a continuum. Higher test score performance represents a student’s ability to handle greater complexity as they use evidence, analyze and solve real-world problems, and communicate their thinking.

    Smarter Balanced defines benchmarks at levels 2, 3 and 4 respectively as foundational, proficient, or advanced levels of grade-level skills, while a “1” shows “inconsistent” demonstrations of grade-level skills. In the case of English language arts, students as early as grade three who achieve levels 2 or above are reading, writing and demonstrating research skills.

    As an example, a sixth-grade writing prompt asks students to research and explain the impact of the 1893 World’s Fair, and different levels of performance show different levels of sophistication, from communicating a few facts to elaborating on how the activities of the fair led to other human accomplishments with long-term impact:

    To understand where improvements are most needed, educators can look at “claim scores” on the assessment — measures of what students have shown they know and can do on specific topics. These show, for example, that 25% of students statewide score below the standard in reading, but 31% score below the standard in writing — an area for greater focus. Since research shows that writing improves reading, ensuring that students are receiving regular writing instruction and practice will improve performance in both areas of literacy.  

    Similarly, in mathematics, California assessments are more sophisticated than those in many other states, as they measure math concepts and procedures (where many state tests begin and end), plus data analysis, problem-solving, and how well students communicate their reasoning through additional performance tasks in which students must solve a complex real-world problem and communicate their reasoning.  

    The states that created and use these assessments believe that when students are asked to learn and show higher-order skills, they are better prepared for later schooling and life than if they were only prepared to bubble in answers on a multiple-choice test.

    A recent study from Washington state provided evidence for this belief. The study found that over half of students who scored a “Level 2 / Nearly Meets” on the Smarter Balanced high school mathematics test (and more than one-third of those who scored a 1) successfully enrolled in post-secondary learning without additional remedial courses, and the large majority succeeded. Among those who scored a 3 or 4, 70% and 82% respectively attended college, and nearly all were successful.

    We hope that educators, parents and policymakers will not only understand and act on what they learn from these assessments, but also use the evidence productively for improving teaching and learning. Smarter Balanced assessments include lesson plans and interim assessments teachers can choose to examine student learning and adjust their teaching throughout the year. The score reports also provide information about the levels at which students are reading and computing, linked to resources parents can access directly to support their children — supplemented by what they know authentically about what their children are learning and doing at home and school. 

    Students’ engagement, parents’ observations, teachers’ reports and classroom-based assignments will always provide more detailed, timely and useful information about individual students’ interests, needs and progress. Hopefully, these assessments can provide a useful adjunct if we know what they mean and how to use them productively. 

    •••

    Linda Darling-Hammond is the president of the California State Board of Education.

    The opinions in this commentary are those of the author. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • California climate initiative could unlock new opportunities for community college students

    California climate initiative could unlock new opportunities for community college students


    Courtesy: California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office

    With each passing year, we learn how a changing climate can affect our lives. For most Californians, two things stand out: bigger, more destructive wildfires and long-term threats to our precious water supply.

    There are proven solutions to these challenges, enabling us to shift to prevention instead of simply responding to growing natural disasters fueled by climate change. The longer we wait to make this change, the greater the consequences and the costs.

    Proposition 4, on the Nov. 5 ballot, represents a strategic investment in California’s environment, its economy and its people. The $10 billion bond measure dedicates $1.5 billion to preventing wildfires and smoke by creating fire breaks near communities, improving forest health to reduce wildfire intensity, supporting specialized firefighting equipment, and deploying early detection and response systems. To protect safe drinking water supplies, it provides $3.8 billion to treat groundwater contaminants, recharge aquifers, rebuild crumbling water infrastructure, and restore watersheds. 

    It also provides an important opportunity for California’s community colleges and the students we serve.

    Proposition 4 will create important jobs in an evolving green economy. The question is how we build the workforce needed to do the work ahead.

    California’s Community Colleges are uniquely positioned to ensure Proposition 4 dollars are leveraged to usher in this new workforce. If it passes, students will see new opportunities in career technical education programs that align with industry needs, including:

    • Expansion of clean energy training programs: Proposition 4 could support programs in solar energy installation, wind turbine maintenance and battery storage technology. By equipping students with these skills, community colleges can prepare them for high-demand jobs in the renewable energy sector, which is projected to grow as California expands its clean energy infrastructure.
    • Green construction and sustainable building techniques: The bond could provide resources to expand programs in sustainable construction, teaching students energy-efficient building methods and retrofitting techniques. These skills are crucial as California ramps up efforts to build climate-resilient infrastructure, creating jobs for students in green construction.
    • Water management and conservation technology: As the state faces ongoing water challenges, Proposition 4 could help community colleges develop programs focused on water conservation and management. Students trained in operating water technologies and wastewater treatment would be in high demand across various sectors, especially agriculture and public utilities.
    • Electric vehicle (EV) maintenance and infrastructure: With the rapid shift toward electric vehicles, funding from Proposition 4 could be used to expand EV technology programs, preparing students to service EVs and maintain charging stations. This would align with the state’s push to phase out gasoline-powered vehicles, creating opportunities for students in a growing market.
    • Work-based learning and internships in climate projects: Proposition 4 could enable partnerships between community colleges and green industry employers to provide internships and hands-on experience. Students could work on real-world projects in renewable energy, water management, or green construction, giving them practical skills and a competitive edge in the job market.

    By dedicating at least 40% of its investment to disadvantaged communities, Proposition 4 ensures that these communities must be part of the work ahead, not witnesses to it.

    As an educator, I see opportunity. California’s 116 community colleges are distributed across the state and are deeply embedded in their communities, particularly those in rural areas. When natural disasters strike, these communities find shelter at their community college campuses.  Proposition 4 is a chance for California to build out its climate infrastructure efficiently by leaning on its community colleges in two ways: (1) sites for infrastructure deployment and (2) for workforce development. By expanding access to green job training programs, Proposition 4 will enable Californians from all backgrounds to participate in climate jobs of the future.

    The students in our community colleges today will be the innovators, technicians and leaders of tomorrow. Proposition 4, through its focus on climate resilience, offers the chance to support these students in gaining the skills they need to succeed in an evolving job market while preventing wildfires, providing safe drinking water, protecting California’s iconic natural heritage, and contributing to the state’s clean energy transition. If we invest in them now, we invest in California’s future.

    •••

    Sonya Christian is the chancellor of the California Community Colleges, the largest system of higher education in the United States.

    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 law could boost Social Security checks for thousands of retired California teachers

    New law could boost Social Security checks for thousands of retired California teachers


    Kindergarten students at George Washington Elementary in Lodi listen to teacher Kristen McDaniel read “Your Teachers Pet Creature” on the first day of school on July 30, 2024.

    Credit: Diana Lambert / EdSource

    The Social Security Fairness Act, signed by President Joe Biden on Sunday, will increase retirement benefits for many educators and other public sector workers, including nearly 290,000 in California.

    The act repeals both the Windfall Elimination Provision and Government Pension Offset laws, which reduced Social Security benefits for workers who are entitled to public pensions, such as firefighters, police officers and teachers, according to the Social Security Department.

    The change in the laws does not mean that California teachers, who do not pay into Social Security, will all get benefits. Instead, teachers who paid into Social Security while working in non-teaching jobs will be eligible for their full Social Security benefits, as will those eligible for spousal and survivor benefits.

    Teachers who had previous careers, or who worked second jobs or summer jobs, benefit from the repeal of the Windfall Elimination Provision, said Staci Maiers, spokesperson for the National Education Association.

    California is one of 15 states that does not enroll its teachers in Social Security. Instead, teachers receive pensions from the California Teachers’ Retirement System, or CalSTRS. 

    “This is about fairness. These unjust Social Security penalties have robbed public service workers of their hard-earned benefits for far too long,” said Becky Pringle, president of the National Education Association in a media release. “They have hurt educators and their families — and damaged the education profession, making it harder to attract and retain educators. And that means students are impacted, too.” 

    At a press conference Sunday, President Joe Biden said the Social Security Fairness Act would mean an increase on average of $360 a month for workers that have been impacted by the laws. There will also be a lump sum retroactive payment to make up for the benefits that workers should have received in 2024, Biden said. No date has been announced for those payments.

    “The bill I’m signing today is about a simple proposition,” Biden said. “Americans who have worked hard all their lives to earn an honest living should be able to retire with economic security and dignity.”

    “It’s a game-changer for a lot of educators,” said Kathy Wylie, a retired teacher who lives in Mendocino. Wylie, who is a few years away from drawing Social Security, worked for a technology company for 15 years before embarking on a 17-year career in education.

    She expects that the bump in retirement funds could encourage some veteran teachers to retire early.

    Biden signed the legislation following decades of advocacy from the National Education Association, the International Association of Fire Fighters and the California Retired Teachers Association. The bipartisan bill was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives on Nov. 12 and the U.S. Senate on Dec. 21.

    The amendments to the Social Security Act apply to monthly benefits after December 2023. The Social Security Department is evaluating how to implement the new law, according to its website.





    Source link

  • How more Hispanic teachers could change the face of California education

    How more Hispanic teachers could change the face of California education


    Credit: Julie Leopo / EdSource

    California has had a racial imbalance between its teacher workforce and its student population for years, with a majority Hispanic student population being taught by teachers who are mostly white. That could be changing, as more people of Hispanic heritage enroll in college teacher preparation programs in the state.

    Overall enrollment in teacher preparation programs in California has decreased in recent years, but the biggest declines have been among white teacher candidates. The result has been a higher percentage of people of color entering teacher preparation programs, according to the state’s Commission on Teacher Credentialing.

    In the 2022-23 school year — the most recent year state data is available — more than half of the new teacher candidates identified themselves as a race other than white. Nearly 40% of the 17,337 newly enrolled teacher candidates that year were Hispanic, and just over 33% were white, according to CTC data.

    That was a stark contrast to the racial makeup of the state’s teacher workforce that same year, when 55% of the state’s 312,124 teachers were white, and Hispanic teachers made up 25% of the workforce from transitional kindergarten (TK) through high school.

    “Over half of our TK-12 student population identifies, and the majority of our English language learners also are Latino,” said José Magaña, executive director of Bay Area Latinos for Education. “The research is pretty clear that not just Latino students and English language learners, but all students, benefit from having a more diverse educator.”

    Latinos for Education offers fellowships to support Latinos in the education system. The Bay Area branch of the organization also has a Latinx Teacher Fellowship program to support beginning teachers and paraprofessionals.

    Research shows that when students are taught by educators who reflect their cultural backgrounds and understand their lived experiences, it results in stronger academic outcomes, greater social-emotional growth, and a profound sense of belonging, said Kai Mathews, executive director of the Urban Ed Academy in San Francisco, which recruits and supports Black male teachers.

    “Increasing the number of Latinx educators is about more than representation — it’s about creating classrooms where every student feels seen, valued and is liberated to be their authentic self,” Mathews said.

    Changing California demographics

    The change in the racial makeup of teacher candidates coincides with the evolving population of the state, where 56% of the K-12 student population was Hispanic last school year, according to the California Department of Education. The number increases to over 60% for children younger than age 5, said Shireen Pavri, assistant vice chancellor of California State University’s educator and leadership programs.

    In the years between 2018 and 2023, the percentage of Hispanic teacher candidates has slowly increased from 31.4% to 39.7%, while the number of white teacher candidates dropped by 10 percentage points, according to CTC data. The number of Hispanic teacher candidates also has been increasing, although it dropped from 7,154 in 2021-22 to 6,934 in 2022-23, when the overall number of teacher candidates declined for a second consecutive year.

    California State University, which prepares the majority of the state’s teachers, had the largest percentage of Hispanic students in its teacher preparation programs in 2022-23 — nearly 50%, according to the CTC’s  “Annual Report Card on California teacher preparation programs.” The number is currently 55%, Pavri said.

    During that same time, the percentage of white candidates in CSU teacher preparation programs decreased, and the percentage of teacher candidates of other races remained flat.

    CSU is leading the way

    “Anecdotally, a lot of our Latinx population, who come into our teacher preparation programs, come in because they want to make a difference,” Pavri said. “They didn’t necessarily see people who looked like them when they were going through school. Many of them came in as English learners. They want to make an impact now on their communities and give back.”

    Some of the recent success at diversifying the pool of teacher candidates at California State University can be attributed to the Center for Transformational Educator Preparation Programs, which has helped to recruit, prepare and retain teachers of color, according to the university.

    Its Transformation Lab, a four-year program that recently ended, increased the retention rate of teacher candidates at some campuses and improved teacher placement numbers at others, Pavri said. At CSU Bakersfield and CSU Northridge, for example, the completion rates for Black candidates increased by 17% and 31% respectively between 2020 and 2023, and Stanislaus State doubled its student teaching placements for historically underserved teacher candidates at Modesto City Schools over a two-year period. 

    The center’s leadership is seeking additional funding to support similar programs in the future.

    The university also operates CalStateTEACH, an online multiple-subject teaching credential program that focuses on recruiting male teachers of color from throughout California.

    In University of California teacher preparation programs, 35% of the teacher candidates are Hispanic, 29% are white, 20% are Asian and 2.8% are Black. There are still slightly more white teacher candidates than Hispanic, 38% and 32.6% respectively, in teacher preparation programs at private universities and colleges.

    State programs bearing fruit

    The increase in the number of Hispanic teacher candidates in teacher preparation programs could be attributed, in part, to efforts by state lawmakers to ease the teacher shortage and diversify the teacher workforce by making earning a credential easier and more affordable. The state has offered degree and coursework alternatives to several tests, established residency and apprenticeship programs and paid for school staff to become teachers.

    District grow-your-own programs and the state’s Classified School Employee Credentialing program and apprenticeship programs are meant to diversify the educator workforce because school staff recruited from the community more closely match the demographics of the student body than traditionally trained and recruited teachers, according to research.

    “All of those state investments, particularly around affordability, have helped incredibly with bringing more Black and brown students into our teaching field,” Pavri said.

    CSU teacher residency programs outpace even the traditional teacher preparation programs in terms of the number of teachers of color enrolled, she said.

    Numbers for other ethnic groups flat

    Despite the efforts, California State University continues to struggle to attract Black teacher candidates, hovering around 3% for years, despite several initiatives to improve their numbers, Pavri said. 

    “While we celebrate this progress, we must confront the persistent underrepresentation of Black, Asian and Pacific Islander educators,” Mathews said. “Our classrooms deserve to reflect the fullness of California’s diversity. Ensuring this kind of equity in the teaching workforce isn’t just good for students—it’s essential to building the inclusive, transformative and liberating system our communities deserve.” 

    Statewide, Black teacher candidates made up 4%, and Asian teacher candidates about 9.5% of total enrollment in California teacher preparation programs between 2018 and 2023, according to CTC data.

    There are fewer Black teachers because of obstacles they encounter on the way to completing their education, including an unwelcoming school environment, disproportionate discipline and overrepresentation in special education, Pavri said. 

    Pursuing a teaching credential, where traditionally student teaching is unpaid, is not affordable for some. Teacher salaries, which are generally lower than the pay for other jobs with the same qualifications, and working conditions also are a deterrent for students from families with limited generational wealth, Pavri said.

    More needs to be done to keep teachers

    The increase in the percentage of Hispanic teacher candidates is positive, but not significant enough, Magaña said. In order to reflect student demographics, the state will need to make significant investments to recruit and retain educators.

    “The numbers are staggering around the number of educators that are leaving the profession, especially our Latino educators,” he said.

    Magaña, who was a classroom teacher for 15 years, said Latino educators often have to take on extra work on campus, whether it is supporting translations or family engagement.

    “It can be a lonely role,” he said. “Sometimes there may be just one Latino educator on campus, and without mentorship and community, and network building, it makes it easier for folks to not feel supported.”





    Source link

  • End of federal grants could worsen teacher shortages

    End of federal grants could worsen teacher shortages


    Credit: Carlos Kosienski/Sipa via AP Images

    Top Takeaways
    • $600 million in federal grants for teacher preparation is in limbo while the court decides whether the Trump administration can cancel the funding.
    • Some California university and school district leaders are unsure whether programs can continue without help from the federal government.
    • The loss of the programs, which sometimes offer stipends and other financial help to teacher candidates, could worsen an already dire shortage of teachers for hard-to-fill jobs.
    • The number of teachers on emergency-style waivers and permits has tripled in the last decade. Teachers on emergency-style permits aren’t required to have completed teacher training.

    The abrupt termination of $600 million in federal teacher-training grants by the Trump administration — and the uncertainty that remains while their cancellation is contested in court — have left teacher candidates and university and school district leaders worried about whether the programs they fund can continue.

    The Teacher Quality Partnership grant and the Supporting Effective Educator Development grant have been used to help recruit and train teachers for high-needs schools and for hard-to-fill jobs, such as teaching science, special education and math.

    At least $148 million in grants go to California teacher preparation programs.

    “CSU simply does not have the resources to sustain these programs without funding from the U.S. Department of Education,” said Amy Bentley-Smith, director of strategic communications and public affairs for the university, in an email.

    The loss of the grants, which fund programs at both universities and school districts, could worsen the state’s teacher shortage and force school districts to hire more teachers on emergency-style permits that don’t require them to complete teacher training. 

    “There’s still acute shortages of credentialed teachers in California,” said Dana Grayson, director of West-Ed’s Teacher Workforce team. “Numbers show that, in the past decade, the number of teachers who aren’t fully credentialed has tripled. So, really making sure we have fully credentialed teachers in classrooms is especially important.”

    During the 2023-24 school year, the most recent year state data is available, 5% of California teachers were on emergency-style permits and waivers, according to newly released state data.

    CSU can’t sustain programs alone

    Without the grants, programs at four CSU campuses — Chico State, Cal State LA, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo and CSU Monterey Bay  — could lose a total of $29 million. The funds provide stipends for teacher candidates, pay for professional development for student residents and their mentor teachers, pay staff salaries and for faculty release time, and support college preparation for K-12 students, Bentley-Smith said.

    Terminating the teacher preparation grants before the end of their terms — usually five years — would likely result in many teacher candidates delaying or abandoning plans to become credentialed teachers, she said.

    “The high-needs, high-poverty schools these programs support, which have historically experienced difficulty in recruiting and retaining teachers, will lose support, collaboration, and access to new and future teachers,” Bentley-Smith said. “Further, teachers in these schools will lose out on professional development opportunities that support them in meeting the needs of their students.”    

    Among the grants in danger of being eliminated is a five-year grant to address a chronic shortage of qualified teachers in rural northeastern California. The $2.4 million grant to Chico State supports a teacher residency program that recruits, trains and prepares teachers to work in high-poverty, hard-to-staff rural communities, according to the California Attorney General’s office, which has sued to stop the terminations.

    Residencies allow teacher candidates to work alongside a mentor teacher in a classroom while completing their teaching credential. 

    The uncertainty around the grant “has led to significant disruptions in the program, including the inability to confidently plan for the upcoming year,” said Rebecca Justeson, a professor at Chico State’s School of Education.

    Termination of the grant would result in two employees being laid off and another having their hours reduced, said Jennifer Oloff-Lewis, a professor at the College of Communication and Education at Chico State.

    California State University officials would not comment on how many employees systemwide might be laid off if the grants are eliminated, saying only that the positions funded by the grants are usually terminated when grants end. 

    More than 1,000 students have completed CSU programs funded by the grants and have gone on to become credentialed teachers working in local school districts, said Bentley-Smith. About 300 teacher residents are in programs now. Some campuses have already committed funding and resources to support students for the upcoming school year. 

    Grants terminated with form letter

    The two federal grants were terminated in early February by the U.S. Department of Education with a form letter that offered no specific reason, except to say that the program might promote diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives; violate civil rights law; be fraudulent, abusive, or duplicate other programs; or otherwise fail to serve the best interests of the United States, according to the lawsuit filed by the state of California and a multi-state coalition.

    When asked if California State University’s diversity, equity and inclusion policies may have put it at odds with the Trump administration, Bentley-Smith said the university complies with all federal and state nondiscrimination laws.

    “We regret that programs that promote equity in learning are being misconstrued as being inconsistent with federal priorities,” she said. “We can think of few greater priorities than ensuring all our youth are taught by skilled and qualified teachers.”

    Credential programs for school staff also at risk

    University programs aren’t the only ones under threat of losing grant funding. Some school districts and nonprofits have also won federal grants for programs to train and recruit teachers to fill hard-to-hire positions.

    The Lindsay School District began a residency program in 2021 in an attempt to recruit and retain teachers. The district had been losing about 25% of its teaching staff each year, according to the National Education Association. Residents are paid $31,400 a school year, and their mentors $7,000. 

    Its $8 million federal teaching grant is among those canceled.  

    Special education is a shortage area that would be hit hard if it loses the grants.

    “The sudden loss of federal funding for teacher residency grant programs will have a significant and profound impact on an already fragile system,” stated a letter from the Tulare Office of Education to state and federal lawmakers. “In 2020-21, 40 percent of schools hiring for open positions in special education reported having difficulties filling vacant openings as compared to 17 percent a decade earlier.”

    Cases make their way through courts

    The plaintiff state attorneys general argue in their lawsuit that termination of the grants, issued without warning, violates the Administrative Procedure Act, would impact teacher preparation programs, and immediately reduce the number of teachers and teacher trainees serving in schools.

    The coalition won a temporary restraining order on March 10 from the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts, requiring the grants be restored temporarily while the case is being litigated. The reprieve was brief. The Supreme Court ruled on April 4 to allow the U.S. Department of Education to terminate the grants while the court case is being heard.

    The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday ruled on a separate lawsuit filed by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, the National Center for Teacher Residencies and the Maryland Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. The court also lifted the temporary restraining order, citing the Supreme Court ruling, effectively freezing the grant funds for the plaintiffs in this suit.

    Teacher preparation programs have an administrative appeals process that allows them to respond by letter to the allegations in the termination missive, according to Reach University President Joe Ross. 

    University leaders sent appeals for each of its three federal grants and received acknowledgment that their appeal had arrived, but otherwise have not heard back.

    “As far as I know, I don’t know of any institution who has heard back on their efforts to engage with the Department of Education directly,” Ross said.

    Program reaches out to high-poverty areas

    Reach University had three federal grants totaling $14.7 million over five years that would be eliminated if the court ultimately agrees with the Trump administration. Although the nonprofit university is based in Oakland, it has been using the grants to support teacher candidates in high-poverty communities in rural Arkansas and Louisiana, where there are no universities within commuting distance.

    The federal grant money was used to start partnerships with school districts and to recruit community college graduates who want to complete a bachelor’s degree while working in a classified position, such as a para-educator, after-school tutor, office clerk or bus driver, in a public school. After earning a degree, teacher candidates can become interns or residents in the district while earning their credential through the university.

    Reach University has had to make immediate cuts, including laying off some staff members and suspending third-party evaluations of the program. The evaluations were used to determine the efficacy of the program and to allow grant programs to share best practices.

    Ross is trying to find local funding to help sustain the work, but there are no plans to reduce the number of teacher candidates the program supports. He is afraid that staff cuts may impact teacher recruitment.

    But Ross is optimistic about the long-term sustainability of these programs. He believes the funding will be replenished somehow because of broad bipartisan support for building a robust teacher pipeline across the country.

    “I think that if you travel through rural communities in California, rural communities in eastern Arkansas, or rural communities in northwest Alabama, you will see lots of different kinds of people, but they’re all trying to figure out how to find enough teachers to serve their kids,” he said.





    Source link