برچسب: impacting

  • Trump’s law reshapes federal loans and Pell Grants, impacting California students

    Trump’s law reshapes federal loans and Pell Grants, impacting California students


    UC Berkeley students stroll around campus near the landmark Sather Gate on April 19, 2017.

    Photos by Alison Yin for EdSource

    Top Takeaways
    • The law blocks graduate students from taking out new Grad PLUS loans and caps Parent PLUS loans starting in 2026.
    • To maintain access to federal student loans, academic programs must soon show alumni earn more than peers without the same degree. 
    • The law expands Pell Grants to short-term workforce training and nixes an earlier proposal that likely would have reduced aid to many Pell recipients.

    The domestic policy law signed by President Donald Trump will have major implications on how students in California and across the country pay for college, with analysts describing it as the most consequential federal higher education legislation in decades.

    The most significant changes will impact access to federal loans and borrower repayment plans. The law also amends Pell Grant eligibility standards, expands qualified expenses for 529 college savings accounts, and is expected to raise the endowment tax on a few private universities, including Stanford. 

    Republican lawmakers say their suite of higher education policies aims to make college more affordable and reel in student debt while broadening access to career and technical education. Critics warn the package’s financial aid measures will do just the opposite, making higher education more expensive for low- and moderate-income students.

    “This is the biggest set of changes to higher education policy in America since at least 1992,” said Robert Kelchen, a professor of higher education at the University of Tennessee, noting that the Higher Education Act hasn’t been reauthorized since 2008. “In this reconciliation bill, there are effectively pieces of legislation that congressional Republicans have been working on for years.”

    The Grad PLUS program will stop accepting new borrowers

    The federal Grad PLUS program, loans which make it possible for graduate students to borrow up to the cost of attendance minus other financial aid, will stop accepting borrowers this time next year. Current borrowers, however, will be grandfathered in and allowed to continue accessing those loans.

    Graduate students will still have access to direct unsubsidized federal loans, but the bill caps those at $50,000 per year for students in professional programs, such as those studying to become lawyers or doctors, and most other graduate degrees at $20,500 per year. 

    The changes will reduce access to graduate school, particularly for low-income students who don’t have other funding options, said Melanie Storey, president and CEO of the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators, a nonprofit membership organization representing financial aid professionals at colleges across the country. “Very capable students who come from more modest backgrounds may be unwilling to pursue graduate or professional education.”

    Some of those students may borrow from private lenders, but those loans “won’t come with the same kinds of terms and conditions and protections that a federal loan has,” she added.

    The University of Southern California may be hit particularly hard by the loss of those PLUS loans. “They have so many graduate programs, and they have a lot of students who do not get financial aid,” Kelchen said.

    The Grad PLUS program disbursed about $2 billion to students at California colleges and universities in the 2023-24 school year, federal data shows.

    Lower caps on Parent PLUS loans will limit borrowing

    Under the federal Parent PLUS loan program, parents used to have the ability to borrow up to the total cost of a student’s college education. A new cap starting July 2026 will limit borrowers to $20,000 per year and a lifetime maximum of $65,000 per student. Supporters argue that borrowing limits will slow rising tuition. 

    Parent PLUS loans have been “the loans of last resort” for students whose parents don’t qualify for private loans because of their credit, Kelchen said, so reducing the borrowing limit may hit students with substantial financial need the hardest. A brief by the Education Trust characterized them as “a double-edged sword for Black borrowers” in particular, who tend to have fewer resources to pay for college due to long-standing inequities in wealth and income.

    Capping the Parent PLUS program will likely either “discourage students from attending college or limit their choices,” Storey said. 

    Institutions will need to get creative to ensure low-income and first-generation students can continue enrolling, said Emmanual Guillory, senior director of government relations at the American Council on Education. 

    “It’s hard to say that institutions will just find a way to make up the difference and will offer more institutional aid for low-income students to help them be able to cover the cost,” he said.

    Former students’ earnings will determine loan access

    The reconciliation bill puts postsecondary programs to a new test: In order to access federal student loans, alumni must earn more than peers who didn’t study for the same degree. 

    Congressional Republicans say the idea is to hold colleges and universities accountable for what alumni ultimately earn when they join the workforce. Loosely, for a given field of study, an undergraduate degree program can continue accessing federal loans if the median earnings of former students exceed the median earnings of high school graduates in the same state. Graduate programs maintain access to federal loans by comparing former students to similarly situated bachelor’s degree holders.

    “It’s a really significant step towards the kind of focus on educational outcomes that we have seen both Republicans and Democrats talk about in recent years,” said Clare McCann, policy director at the Postsecondary Education & Economics Research Center. But McCann said it’s problematic that the measure doesn’t apply a similar standard to undergraduate certificate programs

    An analysis by Preston Cooper, a senior fellow at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute, found that many associate degree programs could lose access to student loans, although associate degree students may be less likely to finance their educations in the first place. 

    “The promise of a lot of these programs is that you shouldn’t have to borrow,” Cooper said. “I kind of think that if these programs do have earnings outcomes that are so low, we probably shouldn’t be giving students loans for those programs, because it’s very unlikely that they’ll be able to repay their loans in full.”

    SAVE, other repayment plans will close to new borrowers

    The repayment terms will also change, reducing the number of plan choices to just two: a standard repayment plan and the Repayment Assistance Plan, which ties payment size to the borrower’s income. Supporters argue that doing so simplifies the options available to borrowers while putting them on a path to repay loan balances in full. 

    Most existing income-driven plans will later close to new borrowers, including the popular Saving on a Valuable Education (SAVE) plan, a Biden administration initiative aimed at lowering monthly payments. In California, about 600,000 borrowers are enrolled in the SAVE plan, according to the Student Borrower Protection Center.

    “For most borrowers, their payments will be drastically more expensive on a monthly and annual basis,” said Aissa Canchola Bañez, policy director of the Student Borrower Protection Center. 

    Loan deferments for economic hardship will be eliminated, and new limits will be placed on forbearance.

    Lawmakers nixed a Pell proposal that worried colleges

    The version of the reconciliation bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives would have increased academic credit requirements per semester to be considered a part-time or full-time student under the Pell Grant program. That proposal sparked concern among officials at California State University and the University of California that tens of thousands of their students would receive less money from Pell — or would lose eligibility altogether because they don’t take enough classes each term. 

    The universities may now breathe a sigh of relief: The final law makes more incremental adjustments to Pell, such as making students who receive full scholarships from other sources ineligible for Pell.

    Students can use Pell for short-term workforce training

    Starting in July 2026, Pell Grant recipients will be able to spend their awards on educational programs that last more than eight but less than 15 weeks at accredited institutions. Supporters of extending Pell to shorter programs say doing so will make educational programs more accessible to adult students who are already in the workforce.

    Kelchen said workforce Pell Grants have gained traction among a broad spectrum of policymakers due to frustration regarding the value of a college degree. “The goal is, by trying to encourage short-term credentials, you get people in through [an educational program] fast and back out into the economy,” he said. 

    But some are skeptical about the return on investment of weeks-long credential programs. Wesley Whistle, a project director who monitors higher education policy at the left-leaning think tank New America, said student earnings after completing short-term certificate programs “aren’t good on average” and that even when they do boost earnings, the positive effect “tends to fade after a year or two.” Researchers with the Institute of Education Sciences reported similar findings.

    Families with 529 plans will have more spending options

    The law also makes several changes to 529 plans, investment accounts typically used to save money for college, in which earnings are tax-deferred and withdrawals for qualified educational expenses are tax-exempt. The new law, starting in 2026, adds items including tutoring, standardized testing fees and some educational therapies to the list of qualified expenses while students are in K-12. After high school, the law also allows funds to be used for some professional credentials, not just college. 

    Researchers at the Brookings Institution have found that 529 plans mainly benefit wealthy families while costing the federal government billions in tax revenue. “Low-income people don’t have enough money to be able to save in this way,” McCann said.

    In California, the state’s 529 plan — ScholarShare 529 — managed more than $15.6 billion in more than 439,000 accounts as of June 2024. 

    A few selective universities will see an endowment tax hike 

    Critics, including the American Council on Education, have also warned that another provision of the law — increasing the endowment tax at a relatively small number of private universities from 1.4% to as much as 8% — could indirectly reduce the institutional financial aid available to their students. However, proponents argue that elite colleges hoard wealth while charging students exorbitant tuition. Based on their current endowment-to-student ratios, Stanford University and the California Institute of Technology would likely be among the universities to see a tax increase, while the University of Southern California, with its much larger student body, would probably be exempt.





    Source link

  • New laws impacting education go into effect as the school year begins

    New laws impacting education go into effect as the school year begins


    George Washington Elementary School Principal Gina Lopez welcomes students on the first day of school on July 30.

    Credit: Diana Lambert / EdSource

    California students, including those in elementary school, will have better access to mental health care, free menstrual products and information about climate change this school year. The expansion of transitional kindergarten also means there will be more 4-year-old students on elementary school campuses. 

    These and other new pieces of education legislation will go into effect this school year, including a bill that bans schools from suspending students for willful defiance and another that offers college students more transparency around the cost of their courses and the materials they will need to purchase for them. 

    Here are a few new laws that may impact students in the 2024-25 school year.

    Climate change instruction required

    Science instruction in all grades — first through 12th — must include an emphasis on the causes and effects of climate change, and methods to mitigate it and adapt to it. Although many schools are already teaching students about climate change, all schools must incorporate the topic into instruction beginning this school year.

    Content related to climate change appears in some of the state curriculum frameworks, according to an analysis of Assembly Bill 285, the legislation that created the requirement.

    Assemblymember Luz Rivas, D-Arieta, the author of the bill, said the legislation will give the next generation the tools needed to prepare for the future and will cultivate a new generation of climate policy leaders in California.

    “Climate change is no longer a future problem waiting for us to act upon — it is already here,” Rivas said in a statement. “Extreme climate events are wreaking havoc across the globe and escalating in severity each year.”

    Menstrual products in elementary bathrooms

    A new law in effect this year adds elementary schools to the public schools that must offer a free and adequate supply of menstruation products — in order to help younger menstruating students.

    Last school year, the Menstruation Equity for All Act went into effect, requiring public schools serving sixth- through 12th-grade students to provide menstruation products. It affected over 2,000 schools. 

    The new law expands the requirement to public schools that serve third- through fifth-grade students. A Senate analysis of the legislation notes that 10% of menstruation periods begin by age 10, according to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report.

    The new law requires affected schools to offer free menstrual products in all-gender bathrooms, women’s bathrooms and at least one men’s bathroom on each campus. The legislation, authored by Assemblymember Eloise Gómez Reyes,D-San Bernardino, includes one men’s bathroom on each campus to offer access to transgender boys who menstruate.

    Supporters of the bill note that menstruation isn’t always predictable and can strike at inopportune times, such as during a test. Menstruation products can also be pricey — especially for students who might also be struggling with food insecurity. 

    Girl Scout Troop 76 in the Inland Empire advocated for the bill. Scout Ava Firnkoess said that menstruation access is important to young girls, like her, who started menstruating early. 

    “I have another friend who also started at a young age. She had to use toilet paper and paper towels because she did not have access to menstrual products,” Firnkoess said in a statement. “We think young students who start their periods need to have access to products, not just those who start in sixth grade or later.”

    Younger students on campus

    Elementary students may seem to be getting a little smaller this year, as transitional kindergarten classes are expanded to children who will turn age 5 between Sept. 2 and June 2. 

    Transitional kindergarten, an additional grade before kindergarten, was created for 4-year-old children who turn 5 before Dec. 2. It has been expanded each year since 2022 to include more children aged 4. All 4-year-old students will be eligible in the fall of 2025.

    Gov. Gavin Newsom and State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond have celebrated the expansion of transitional kindergarten, pointing to numbers that show enrollment doubled over the past two years, from 75,000 in 2021-22, to 151,000 in 2023-24. However, a recent analysis by CalMatters found that the percentage of children eligible for transitional kindergarten who actually enrolled had gone down 4 to 7 percentage points.

    Colleges must disclose costs

    The typical California college student is expected to spend $1,062 on books and supplies in the 2024-25 academic year, according to the California Student Aid Commission.

    The exact costs can be hard for students to predict, leaving them uncertain about how much money to budget for a given class. Assembly Bill 607, which Newsom signed last year, requires California State University campuses and community colleges to disclose upfront the estimated costs of course materials and fees for some of their courses this school year. The bill asks University of California campuses to do the same, but does not make it a requirement.

    The schools must provide information for at least 40% of courses by Jan. 1 of next year, increasing that percentage each year until there are cost disclosures for 75% of courses by 2028. This year, campuses should also highlight courses that use free digital course materials and low-cost print materials, according to the legislation.

    Proponents of the law, which was co-authored by Assemblymembers Ash Kalra, D-San Jose; Isaac Bryan, D-Los Angeles; and Sabrina Cervantes, D-Inland Empire, said it will promote price transparency. The bill covers digital and physical textbooks as well as software subscriptions and devices like calculators. 

    A student speaking in support of AB 607 in May 2023 said she felt “helplessly exposed and vulnerable” when she had to appeal to a professor for help covering the surprise costs of a textbook’s online course content.

    “If I would have known that a month ahead of time, I could have organized and evaluated my budget in an effective manner for the entire semester,” said Rashal Azar. “This would have prevented my financial anxiety and not triggered my mental health as well.”

    TK exempt from English language test

    Students enrolled in transitional kindergarten, also known as TK, are no longer required to take the initial English Language Proficiency Assessment for California (ELPAC). The test, which measures proficiency in listening, speaking, reading and writing in English, is required to be taken within 30 days of enrollment in kindergarten through 12th grade, if parents indicate in a survey that their children speak another language at home.

    Previously, transitional kindergartners also had to take the ELPAC when enrolling. But many school district staff and advocates for English learners said the test was not designed for 4-year-old children and that it was not identifying English learners accurately, because the children were too young to answer questions correctly.

    The California Department of Education has directed school districts to mark children’s English language acquisition status as “to be determined” in the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System, if their parents indicate on the home language survey that their primary or native language is a language other than English. These students will take the initial ELPAC when they begin kindergarten the following year.

    Californians Together, which advocates for English learners, and Early Edge California, which advocates for quality early education for all children, were among the organizations that celebrated the bill.

    “As the parent of bilingual children and a dual language learner myself, I deeply appreciate Governor Newsom, Assemblymember (Al) Muratsuchi, and California’s legislators for supporting our young multilingual learners by championing AB 2268,” said Patricia Lozano, executive director of Early Edge California in a news release. “This bill will create more support tailored to their needs and strengths, so they can learn and thrive from the early years onward.”

    Kids can consent to mental health care

    A new law that took effect in July makes it easier for children on Medi-Cal who are 12 or older to consent to mental health treatment inside and outside of schools. Children older than 12 on private insurance can already consent to mental health care without parental consent.

    Previously, students in this age group could only consent to mental health treatment without parental approval under a limited number of circumstances: incest, child abuse or serious danger, such as suicidal ideation.

    “From mass shootings in public spaces and, in particular, school shootings, as well as fentanyl overdoses and social media bullying, young people are experiencing a new reality,” said Assemblymember Wendy Carrillo, D-Los Angeles, author of the bill. “The new law is about “making sure all young people, regardless if they have private health insurance or are Medi-Cal recipients, have access to mental health resources.”

    Children who need mental health care but do not have consent from their parents could potentially seek help from social media and other online resources of sometimes dubious quality, according to the legislation.

    The legislation allows mental health professionals to determine whether parental involvement is “inappropriate” and also whether the child in question is mature enough to consent.

    California Capitol Connection, a Baptist advocacy group, opposed the bill, stating, “In most cases, a parent knows what is best for their child.”

    This is not strictly an education bill, but it does affect schools. The law notes that school-based providers, such as a credentialed school psychologist, find that some students who want to avail themselves of mental health resources are not able to get parental consent.

    No willful defiance suspensions

    Beginning this school year, and for the next five years, California students across all grade levels cannot be suspended for willful defiance.

    Acts of willful defiance, according to Senate Bill 274, include instances where a student is intentionally disruptive or defies school authorities. Instead of being suspended, these students will be referred to school administrators for intervention and support.

    SB 274 builds on previous California legislation that had already banned willful defiance suspensions among first-through-eighth-grade students, and had banned expulsions for willful defiance across the board. 

    Studies show that willful defiance suspensions disproportionately impact Black male students and increase the likelihood of students dropping out of school.

    Los Angeles Unified, Oakland Unified, San Francisco Unified and other school districts have already banned the practice.

    SB 274 would apply to all grades TK through 12 in both traditional public schools and charters. The bill would also prohibit schools from suspending or expelling students for being tardy or truant.

    Schools can’t ‘out’ students

    After Jan. 1, California schools boards will not be permitted to pass resolutions requiring teachers and staff to notify parents if they believe a child is transgender. 

    Newsom signed the Support Academic Futures and Educators for Today’s Youth, or SAFETY Act, in July in response to the more than a dozen California school boards that proposed or passed parental notification policies in just over a year. At least seven California school districts passed the policies, often after heated public debate.

    The policies require school staff to inform parents if a child asks to use a name or pronoun different from the one assigned at birth, or if they engage in activities and use facilities designed for the opposite sex. 

    The new law protects school staff from retaliation if they refuse to notify parents of a child’s gender preference. The legislation also provides additional resources and support for LGBTQ+ students at junior high and high schools.

    “Politically motivated attacks on the rights, safety and dignity of transgender, nonbinary and other LGBTQ+ youth are on the rise nationwide, including in California,” said Assemblymember Chris Ward, D-San Diego, who introduced the legislation along with the California Legislative LGBTQ Caucus.





    Source link

  • New year starts with new laws impacting education

    New year starts with new laws impacting education


    Gov. Gavin Newsom signs legislation.

    Photo: Office of the Governor of California

    New California state laws will protect the privacy of LGBTQ+ students, ensure that the history of Native Americans is accurately taught and make it more difficult to discriminate against people of color based on their hairstyles.

    These and other new pieces of legislation will be in effect when students return to campuses after winter break.

    Schools can’t require parental notification

    Assembly Bill 1955, signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in July, forbids California school boards from passing resolutions that require school staff, including teachers, to notify parents if they believe a child is transgender.

    The Support Academic Futures and Educators for Today’s Youth, or SAFETY Act, also protects school staff from retaliation if they refuse to notify parents of a child’s gender preference. The legislation, which goes into effect on Jan. 1, also provides additional resources and support for LGBTQ+ students at junior high and high schools.

    The legislation was created in response to the more than a dozen California school boards that proposed or passed parental notification policies in just over a year. The policies require school staff to inform parents if a child asks to use a name or pronoun different from the one assigned at birth, or if they engage in activities and use facilities designed for the opposite sex.

    “Politically motivated attacks on the rights, safety and dignity of transgender, nonbinary and other LGBTQ+ youth are on the rise nationwide, including in California,” said Assemblymember Chris Ward, D-San Diego, author of the bill, in a media release. “While some school districts have adopted policies to forcibly out students, the SAFETY Act ensures that discussions about gender identity remain a private matter within the family.”

    Opponents of the bill, including Assemblymember Bill Essayli, R-Riverside, indicated that the issue will be settled in court. 

    Accurate Native American history

    Building a Spanish mission — out of Popsicle sticks or sugar cubes — was once a common assignment for fourth-grade students in California. The state curriculum framework adopted in 2016 says this “offensive” assignment doesn’t help students understand this era, particularly the experiences of Indigenous Californians subject to forced labor and deadly diseases from Spanish colonizers.

    But supporters of a new law that goes into effect on Jan. 1 say that there are still grave concerns that the history of California Native Americans — including enslavement, starvation, illness and violence — is still misleading or completely absent from the curriculum.

    AB 1821, authored by Assemblymember James Ramos, D-San Bernardino, aims to address this. When California next updates its history-social science curriculum — on or after Jan. 1 —  it asks that the Instruction Quality Commission consult with California tribes to develop a curriculum including the treatment and perspectives of Native Americans during the Spanish colonization and the Gold Rush eras.

    “The mission era of Spanish occupation was one of the most devastating and sensitive periods in the history of California’s native peoples and the lasting impact of that period is lost in the current curriculum,” according to a statement from the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, one of the supporters of the legislation.

    Teaching about desegregation in California

    Another law that also goes into effect this year also requires the state to update its history-social science curriculum. AB 1805 requires that the landmark case Mendez v. Westminster School District of Orange County be incorporated into the history social-science curriculum updated on or after Jan. 1.

    The case, brought in 1945, challenged four districts in Orange County that segregated students. The plaintiffs in the case were Mexican-American parents whose children were refused admission to local public schools. The case led to California becoming the first state to ban public school segregation — and it set a precedent for Brown v. Board of Education, which banned racial segregation in public schools.

    The Mendez case is referenced in the history-social science curriculum that was last adopted in 2016 for fourth- and 11th-grade students, as well as the Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum, as an example of inter-ethnic bridge-building.

    The Westminster School District wrote a statement in support of the law to ensure that the case is “properly recognized and rightfully incorporated into the state’s education curriculum.”

    Protecting against hair discrimination

    Assembly Bill 1815 makes it more difficult to discriminate against people of color, including students, based on their hairstyle. Although this type of discrimination is already prohibited by the CROWN Act, it has not extended to amateur and club sports.

    The new legislation also clarifies language in the California Code, eliminating the requirement that a trait be “historically” associated with a race, as opposed to culturally, in order to be protected. 

    “(This bill) addresses an often-overlooked form of racial discrimination that affects our youth — bias based on hair texture and protective hairstyles, such as braids, locks, and twists,” stated a letter of support from the ACLU. “By extending anti-discrimination protections within amateur sports organizations, this bill acknowledges and seeks to dismantle the deep-rooted prejudices that impact children and adolescents of color in their sports activities and beyond.”

    Protection for child content creators

    Newsom signed two pieces of legislation in September that offer additional protection to children who star in or create online content.

    The new laws expand state laws that were meant to protect child performers.  Senate Bill 764 and Assembly Bill 1880 require that at least 15% of the money earned by children who create, post or share online content, including vloggers, podcasters, social media influencers and streamers, be put in a trust they can access when they reach adulthood.

    “A lot has changed since Hollywood’s early days, but here in California, our laser focus on protecting kids from exploitation remains the same,” Newsom said in a statement. “In old Hollywood, child actors were exploited. In 2024, it’s now child influencers. Today, that modern exploitation ends through two new laws to protect young influencers on TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, and other social media platforms.”





    Source link

  • ‘A step backwards’: How federal threats to DEI are impacting California schools 

    ‘A step backwards’: How federal threats to DEI are impacting California schools 


    Credit: Carlos Kosienski/Sipa via AP Images

    Tough decisions lie ahead for schools across California as the federal government cracks down on diversity, equity and inclusion efforts.  

    The latest measure came in the form of a letter issued Friday by the U.S. Department of Education, giving K-12 schools across the country two options: to eliminate programs focused on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) within two weeks, or face unspecified cuts in federal funding.  

    “I fully anticipate that it will have a chilling effect on school districts, but also colleges and universities,” said Royel Johnson, who leads the University of Southern California Race and Equity Center’s National Assessment of Collegiate Campus Climates. 

    The Department of Education’s letter isn’t law — nor is it legal, Johnson said. 

    However, many advocates and community members say they are concerned that more and more districts will gut their diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives out of fear and deprive students from marginalized backgrounds of the support they need to succeed in the classroom and beyond.

    “We often think about California as being protected from this larger right wing movement,” Johnson said. “But as we saw with changing patterns and demographic votes in the presidential election, I think there are many people in California who are wrestling with this conservative movement and who are afraid of it — and who are proactively or preemptively making decisions.” 

    ‘An underlying disconnect’: The letter 

    The Department of Education’s letter opens with the words “Dear Colleague,” but the ensuing message takes on a different tone. 

    “Rather than engaging in that work of acknowledging and affirming educators, what the Trump administration has done thus far is to express hostility and disdain,” said John Rogers, a professor at UCLA’s School of Education and Information Studies and associate dean for research/public scholarship. 

    The letter specifically claims that white and Asian American students, including those from lower income backgrounds, have been discriminated against and that “educational institutions have toxically indoctrinated students with the false premise that the United States is built upon ‘systemic and structural racism.’”

    Increasing schools’ scores on the Nation’s Report Card has been a justification for some of the administration’s changes, according to Rogers. 

    But instead of boosting student performance, Rogers maintains that the directive could “throw K-12 schools into further tumult” due to the high fiscal costs of culture wars. Just last year, conflicts surrounding race and LGBTQ+ issues cost schools more than $3 billion nationwide. 

    “They’re pushing superintendents and those underneath the level of the superintendency to spend time seeking out legal counsel, talking with other educational leaders, trying to figure out, ‘What do we do? What are we doing now that might be considered problematic? Do we need to take action, etc?’” Rogers said.  

    “All of that time and energy, and to the extent that they’re seeking out costly legal counsel, that has real costs associated with it. It’s pushing people away from the important work of improving student learning and supporting student well-being.” 

    While Rogers maintained that the letter was hostile in tone, he also described it as vague and confusing — a sentiment shared by many.  

    Rogers said: “If I was a superintendent, I would want to know: ‘Can my principals bring together a group of Asian American students to talk about whether they’ve experienced anti-Asian hate? Could my district invite African American parents to share their oral histories about growing up in my community as part of African American History Month, or, for that matter, can we even celebrate African American History Month?” 

    Superintendents, he said, “don’t have enough information — yet they’re being given two weeks to either take dramatic action or not, of which they have really no sense of what that would mean.”

    ‘Uncharted territory’ for California districts  

    With new, unclear circumstances on the horizon, more questions than answers are percolating through school districts across California. 

    Nikki Henry, spokesperson for Fresno Unified School District, said Tuesday that the district and its attorneys are reviewing the letter to understand its impact. 

    Fresno Unified’s school board in 2020 passed a resolution declaring the district an anti-racist institution that would “examine and confront biases” and in January reaffirmed the district as a safe place for all students, including immigrant students and families.

    That mindset and approach may put Fresno Unified, which received around $238 million in federal funds this school year, in jeopardy of losing such funding under the new administration.

    With nearly 93% of its students identifying as members of minority communities, the district has implemented “strong” diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, Henry said. Their DEI policy ensures that students have equitable access to the district’s programs and services, that the curriculum reflects and celebrates diversity and that there are sufficient academic, social-emotional and behavioral supports. 

    Further south, administrators in Los Angeles Unified, the state’s largest district, have also expressed support for students of all backgrounds — a move that is lauded by Evelyn Aleman, the organizer of Our Voice/Nuestra Voz, a bilingual Facebook group largely made up of parents and advocates.

    “In terms of advocating for and supporting the difference between populations that it serves, (LAUSD])really does try to do that, so … I think we’re going to be OK. I think we have a district that gets us.”

    In a statement to EdSource, a Los Angeles Unified spokesperson said the district “adheres to all federal and state law and guidance” — and that if there are discrepancies between the two, they would be resolved through the state. 

    However, last July, Parents Defending Education, a Virginia-based conservative group, filed a complaint with the Office for Civil Rights against the Los Angeles Unified School District for its Black Student Achievement Plan. 

    Months later, the district watered down the language surrounding the program. 

    And some members of LAUSD’s larger community, including United Teachers Los Angeles President Cecily Myart-Cruz, said they fear that this decision could signal how the district might respond to directives from the federal government. 

    “If I only had to go on that (decision regarding the Black Student Achievement Plan), then I would say I’m concerned,” Myart-Cruz said. “I believe in our students. … I know that UTLA, we’re going to stand right alongside our students and our community. … If we put resources in for our students, then it helps everyone.” 

    Other districts like Clovis Unified, however, maintain that they will not be impacted, according to spokesperson Kelly Avants. 

    Based on the way Clovis Unified is interpreting the Education Department’s letter, Avants said affected districts are likely those with hiring practices or scholarships with DEI guidelines or selection criteria based solely on race or gender. 

    Avants added that all Clovis Unified activities to celebrate different cultures are open to the entire student population. 

    “We’ve not gone one direction or the other,” Avants said. “We really have tried to be sensitive to our programs being holistic versus centrally focused.” 

    What’s at stake

    Experts and teachers have continually emphasized that diversity, equity and inclusion programs enrich students’ learning and that they also play a critical role in students feeling like they belong. 

    “DEI provides mechanisms for addressing issues of safety and security for students who sometimes experience physical harm, psychological harm,” Johnson said. “But, if we start removing the very mechanisms that are designed to address these issues, we’re going to see higher reports and students having concerns around their safety at school.” 

    He added, “If students feel a sense of connectedness and belonging to the school environment, they’re more likely to be retained, they’re more likely to come to school on time and persist toward their goals.”

    Several indicators of student success, from student attendance rates to engagement, rise when DEI programs are implemented, he said. 

    And in the classroom, Aleman from Our Voice/Nuestra Voz, emphasized the importance of learning about the contributions of immigrants from various backgrounds. 

    “We’re at a stage of global interaction that requires that we understand … the rich history and contributions of immigrants and different populations,” Aleman said. “We are a heterogeneous culture. … and we don’t understand why the administration doesn’t understand that.” 

    Pushing back 

    While the Department of Education’s letter focuses on race, civil rights protections — including through diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives — support students from various identities based on other factors, including gender, disability and age, according to Amir Whitaker, senior policy counsel of the ACLU of Southern California.

    And Johnson said marginalized groups, including those who are LGBTQ+ and first generation, could also be impacted by potential cuts to DEI.

    “I hope that school district leaders and leaders of college and universities will not back down from this moment — and lean into the institutional values that have animated their work for years prior to this erroneous sort of guidance that is designed to threat and intimidate,” Johnson said. “If we all roll back and back down at this moment, then our students will suffer.” 

    Whitaker added that the very policies that the letter cites — like the Civil Rights Act of 1964 — were victories that “people fought and died for.” 

    The Trump administration’s action, he said, is a “a step backwards in this nation’s journey towards equality and justice.”

    “If California backs down,” Johnson said, “I wonder also what message that sends to the rest of the country, that this ultra-progressive place is already making concessions and their sort of commitments to do DEI, what that might mean for less progressive places who are figuring out where they fit within this conversation.” 





    Source link