برچسب: schools

  • Opening of L.A. schools coincides with earthquake

    Opening of L.A. schools coincides with earthquake


    District Superintendent Alberto Carvalho welcomes students back to campus on Aug. 12, 2024.

    Credit: Los Angeles Unified / X

    A light 4.4-magnitude earthquake and an industrial explosion near one school rattled the Los Angeles Unified School District’s first day of school for the 2024-25 academic year on Monday.

    District Superintendent Alberto Carvalho said at a news conference on Monday afternoon at Venice High School that no LAUSD buildings were damaged in the temblor, and nobody was injured.

    He was only aware of one school — Woodrow Wilson High School — that had to evacuate. 

    Students elsewhere had to duck under their desks and stay far from windows. Meanwhile, Carvalho said LAUSD is working with the district attorney to investigate the report of a fireball and explosion near Jordan Senior High School on Monday. He said the explosion likely took place at an Atlas metal recycling plant.

    The superintendent also addressed the progress LAUSD made this past year — and provided an overview of his goals for the year to come. School board Vice President Scott Schmerelson also weighed in, along with board members Nick Melvoin and Rocio Rivas, and other district officials. 

    “We know that for some of our students and their teachers that the summer felt too short, but we’re glad you’re here. We’re grateful that you’re in seats,” Melvoin said Monday. 

    “We have a lot of work to do to make this a successful school year and make sure that LA Unified is the greatest urban district, not just in the state, not just in the country, but in the world.” 

    Academics

    On top of improved California Smarter Balanced Assessment scores across the board, Carvalho touted the district’s graduation rate, which he said was nearly 87% and the highest in LAUSD history. 

    He also pointed to the district’s Summer of Learning program, which he said was attended by roughly 120,000 students. 

    Schmerelson also briefly discussed adult education and emphasized the importance of recruiting more women into the district’s airplane mechanics programs. 

    “It’s free to our LAUSD students, and adult ed is free — and adult ed students are our students too,” he said. 

    Melvoin, meanwhile, noted that more than 14,000 students are enrolled in LAUSD’s transitional kindergarten (TK) program this year. 

    School facilities and transportation

    Carvalho said LAUSD made history by having enough bus drivers on the road on the first day of school — with no substitute drivers needed. He added that the district hired more than 100 drivers during the summer. 

    The district also made its single largest acquisition of electric buses, 180. Melvoin added that LAUSD students receive a free Metro pass to help with transportation needs. 

    Carvalho also emphasized the importance of the bond measure the school board recently voted to add to the November ballot. 

    “Today’s earthquake underscores the need for our system to be serious… about seismic resilience,” he said Monday. 

    Melvoin added that the district will also be unveiling a new outdoor education center in January. 

    Staffing 

    Carvalho said on Monday that the district has a fully credentialed, certified teacher in every classroom this school year. Meanwhile, he said the district is currently home to an unprecedented network of health care professionals. 

    “The teachers are so welcoming,” Rivas said. “And the students were just so ready, ready to learn.”





    Source link

  • How California can help all schools harness AI, avoid its pitfalls

    How California can help all schools harness AI, avoid its pitfalls


    Participants at the Think Forward: Learning with AI forum in April were asked to share their hopes and fears for the future of AI in an opening exercise.

    CREDIT: Photo by Ray Mares Photography

    In recent months, the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) faced a significant setback when the tech provider it contracted to build personalized report cards for students went out of business. This was both a major financial loss for the district and a significant loss for students. The chatbot dust-up underscores a critical issue in our education system: the need for robust, forward-thinking policies and practices to navigate the integration of technology in our schools. Our school systems must be able to not only withstand disruptions but thrive on them.

    As post-pandemic learning gaps widen, school districts everywhere are at an inflection point when it comes to the use of artificial intelligence (AI). AI offers unprecedented opportunities to tackle complex challenges like widening achievement gaps, teacher shortages, and mental health crises among students — but AI systems must also promote equity and access, particularly for historically marginalized communities. There must be policy guardrails to protect student privacy. And there must be high quality training to empower educators. Achieving this vision requires bold leadership and a clear understanding of each stakeholder’s role.

    While AI can be a powerful tool to address long-standing inequities and improve educational outcomes, it requires strategic and collaborative efforts. The call to action is clear: Educators, policymakers, education technology innovators and community leaders must join forces to create resilient, adaptable education systems.

    With a thriving tech sector, including a broad base of AI startups, California is uniquely positioned to lead the country in the use of AI in education. The state Department of Education has already offered early guidance to schools. The Los Angeles County Office of Education’s cross-sector task force developed guidelines to support responsible AI implementation across 80 school districts. Los Angeles’ Da Vinci Academy piloted the use of AI in project-based learning. Lynwood Unified has been a leader in thinking about how AI can be used responsibly to transform district operations and learning systems. These are steps in the right direction, but more is needed.

    A new report that my organization, the Center on Reinventing Public Education (CRPE), just released, “Wicked Opportunities: Leveraging AI to Transform Education,” presents an action plan for harnessing AI to transform education.

    Here’s what California could do next:

    1. Think big about how AI can transform education. Leaders in the space must have a clear vision for the future of education before technology can help realize that vision. The state should consider fostering partnerships between educators, policymakers, Silicon Valley ed-tech developers, and community leaders to rethink and redesign schools and education systems for a world where generative artificial intelligence is ubiquitous. 
    2. Help districts use AI strategically. Districts face an overwhelming number of AI-enabled tools and “solutions,” and risk spreading limited resources on a random assortment of disconnected products. California’s educational county offices can play a role in helping districts identify priorities and streamline funds to proven AI-enabled tools and strategies designed to solve specific problems. 
    3. Allocate funds to support and test AI initiatives, particularly in low-income and historically marginalized communities. CRPE’s research with the Rand Corp. shows that school districts with more advantaged populations are ahead in training their teachers on AI. Funding and evidence-building initiatives are needed to close, rather than widen, existing learning gaps. 
    4. Provide detailed, actionable implementation strategies to help districts navigate AI adoption effectively. Our report suggests California and other states should be “dogged about implementation,” ensuring schools get technical assistance and research partnerships to support them as they try various approaches. 
    5. Make sure there are effective state policy guardrails. It’s essential for California to provide ongoing policy guidance and rules so that every district need not go it alone. Legislation under consideration in Sacramento calls for policies to be in place by January 2026. While we are glad to see policy attention, protections for kids cannot wait that long. A better approach would be to begin piloting policies immediately and revising them as needed. 

    California, a leader in technological innovation, must ensure that its education systems are future-ready. By embracing these strategies, California can lead the nation in transforming education through AI. The LAUSD incident serves as a stark reminder of what happens when systems are unprepared for technological integration. Let’s use this moment as a catalyst for change, ensuring that our schools are equipped to harness the positive potential of AI for the benefit of all students.

    •••

    Robin Lake is director of the Center for Reinventing Public Education (CRPE) which is housed at Arizona State University’s Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College.

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





    Source link

  • Cellphone bans becoming more common in California schools

    Cellphone bans becoming more common in California schools


    Credit: Alison Yin / EdSource

    Este artículo está disponible en Español. Léelo en español.

    In California and across the United States this year, policies banning or restricting student cellphone use on school campuses are being enacted in an effort to curb bullying, classroom distractions and addiction to the devices.

    “It’s part of the zeitgeist right now, and there is a trend toward cellphone restriction,” said Troy Flint, spokesperson for the California School Boards Association. “There’s more scrutiny of the issue now than there was previously.”

    Lincoln Unified School District in Stockton, Santa Barbara Unified, San Francisco Unified, Roseville City School District and Folsom Cordova Unified near Sacramento are among the California districts starting the school year with cellphone restrictions on their campuses.

    Cellphone restrictions look different across the state, depending on school district, school or even individual teachers’ policies. In some schools, students entering a campus or classroom are required to put their phones in an electronic pouch that can only be unlocked by school staff with a special magnet. In other schools, cellphones are turned off and put in lockers in the classroom. More commonly, students are asked to turn off their phones and to put them in their backpacks or pockets during class time.

    California district leaders got a nudge from Gov. Gavin Newsom last week when he urged them to take immediate steps to restrict cellphone use this academic year. Newsom reminded school leaders that legislation signed in 2019 gives them the authority to regulate smartphones during school hours.

    “Excessive smartphone use among young people is linked to increased anxiety, depression, and other mental health issues,” Newsom said in a letter to school leaders on Aug. 14. 

    California lawmakers are also considering proposed legislation to restrict student cellphone use on all public school campuses, a mandate at least five other states have already enacted. Without a statewide mandate, it’s up to districts, schools or teachers to implement a policy.

    San Diego Unified officials have indicated they are studying the issue, while Los Angeles Unified (LAUSD), the state’s largest school district, is finalizing a policy that will ban student cellphone and social media use. It will go into effect in January.

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

    Melvoin commended Newsom for encouraging other districts to follow suit. 

    “I have seen the positive effects firsthand at schools that have already implemented a phone-free school policy, and look forward to seeing the benefits of this policy take hold districtwide next semester,” Melvoin said.

    But the policies have had pushback from some parents who fear losing touch with their children during emergencies.

    “Some parents, some families feel that the cellphone is essential for notification in the case of a natural disaster, a school emergency, or a school shooting,” said the CSBA’s Flint. “Or some people use it for less extreme, but still important reasons, like monitoring their kids’ required medicine. Some families with students with disabilities like to have an additional level of contact with their students at schools.”

    Cellphone addiction is a problem

    School cellphone bans gained momentum nationally in May when Surgeon General Vivek Murthy issued an advisory calling on policymakers, technology companies, researchers and families to minimize the harm of social media and to create safer, healthier online environments to protect children online. 

    Murthy said there is growing evidence that social media use is associated with harm to a young person’s mental health, adding that 95% of children between the ages of 13 and 17 use at least one social media platform, and more than a third use social media constantly. 

    Santa Barbara Unified has made mental health a priority when it comes to cellphone use on campus. The Off and Away policy requires cellphones be turned off and put away in classrooms, and anywhere on a campus where learning is taking place, said Assistant Superintendent ShaKenya Edison. 

    Consequences for not complying with the policy ranges from students and parents being required to meet with school staff, to confiscating phones. Students may be referred to counseling or a therapist if necessary, Edison said.

    “One of the things that the (planning) committee was very clear about — we had doctors also on our committee, and psychologists — is that we need to treat cellphone usage as an addiction, not as defiance,” Edison said. “So it really is trying to get at the root of the dependency of the phone.”

    Students became more reliant on cellphones and smartwatches during the Covid pandemic, when the devices were the only way they could connect to their social circle, Edison said. Students sometimes use their phone to deal with the anxiety of being in the classroom, or when they are struggling with academics, she said. 

    University of San Francisco researchers found that 12- to 13-year-old children in the U.S. doubled their non-school related screen time from 3.8 hours a day to 7.7 hours a day when campuses were closed during the pandemic. 

    Warning signs of smartphone addiction in students include becoming distressed at the thought of being without their phone, thinking about their phone when not using it, interrupting whatever they are doing when contacted on their phone, or having arguments with others because of phone use, said Jason Nagata, associate professor of pediatrics at the University of California San Francisco. 

    Santa Barbara Unified is taking on the cellphone addiction problem inside and outside the classroom. Along with including parents in the planning of the program, the district offers parents information about monitoring social media and age-appropriate apps on their website.

    “We receive gratitude from parents saying, ‘Thank you for tackling this. I’m trying to tackle it at home, and I don’t know how to tackle the dependency. So thank you for at least dealing with it on the school site,’ ” Edison said.

    Students are more focused without phones

    Andrea Blair-Simon says the ban on cellphone use in the Folsom Cordova Unified School District allows her eighth-grade daughter, Laila, to fully focus on her studies in the classroom and to socialize with others during breaks and lunch. She had previously watched her daughter sit with her friends texting one another instead of talking.

    “I love the cellphone policy,” Blair-Simon said. “I think it benefits the kids. I think it benefits the teachers. I’m not saying don’t have it (a cellphone), I’m just saying it’s not necessary during school hours. Before or after, do whatever you want. It’s your life. It’s your own time. But when you’re on a teacher’s time — school time — using school resources, listen to your teacher.”

    The no-phone policies also curtail online bullying, Blair-Simon said. Things like posting unflattering pictures with mean comments can damage kids’ self-image, she said.

    Under last year’s cellphone policy update, Folsom Cordova Unified no longer permits students in transitional kindergarten through eighth grade to use cellphones, smartwatches or other mobile communication devices anywhere on campus during the school day. High school students can’t use them in classrooms.

    Last year, Laila and her classmates were required to use a lockable Yondr Pouch, which allows students to keep their phone, but with no access to it unless a teacher or school administrator unlocks the pouch. Now, instead of pouches, students have been asked to turn off their phones and put them away.

    “This year, there are no warnings, and you are to be sent straight to the office,” Laila said. “This year, they have a little locker in the office, like a phone locker, and it has to be locked in there until the end of the day if they catch you with it.” 

    Laila would like to have her phone at lunch or during passing periods, but she acknowledges that students are more focused and spend more time talking to one another during breaks than before the ban.

    Policies improve school climate

    Drama teacher Keith Carames says there has been a positive shift in culture and climate at James Lick Middle School in San Francisco since the school began requiring students to lock their phones in a Yondr Pouch at the beginning of the school day. 

    “There’s been a significant shift away from the buzzing and the distractions,” Carames said. “There’s been a significant decrease in digital bullying.”

    The school is part of San Francisco Unified, which requires cellphones, smartwatches and other mobile devices to be turned off and put away during classes and passing periods. 

    James Lick Middle School has its own, stricter policy that requires students to present a lockable pouch, provided by the school, when they show up on the campus — empty or not. If the student does not have their pouch, the phone is confiscated. If a student’s phone is not in the pouch during the school day, security is called to confiscate it, Carames said.

    Some districts in the state without districtwide cellphone bans allow individual schools to make their own rules about cellphone use on their campus.

    Fresno Unified relies on a 20-year-old policy that prohibits students from using phones in an inappropriate and disruptive way, like invading someone’s privacy, cheating on tests or ridiculing or shaming someone. Students who violate the policy can have their phones confiscated, or can be suspended or expelled.

    The board policy is the “minimum requirement” for the district, Fresno Unified spokesperson A.J. Kato told EdSource on Wednesday. Each school determines how the policy is implemented on its campus and has the discretion to go beyond what the policy dictates.

    Bullard High in Fresno Unified introduced the Yondr Pouch in 2022 to create a phone-free campus, The Fresno Bee reported.  Students must lock their phones in the pouch during the school day – even during lunch. After 2022-23, the first school year with the pouches, Bullard High officials credited its 17% improvement in English proficiency to the restriction, The Bee reported. 

    Teachers largely support restrictions

    Teachers nationwide say cellphones are a major distraction for students in class, according to Pew Research released in 2023. A third of public K-12 teachers surveyed for the report said cellphones are a major problem, while 20% said they are a minor problem. Almost three-quarters of the high school teachers surveyed said phones are a major distraction to their students, compared with 33% of middle school teachers and 6% of elementary school teachers.

    Cellphone disruptions in the classroom have been a recurring topic for teachers and administrators at staff meetings in the Roseville City School District, said school board member Jonathan Zachreson.

    Some teachers in the district conducted an informal experiment, asking students to note how many times they received alerts on their phones during class. The teachers discovered that the students who had the most alerts were performing worse than others academically, Zachreson said.

    The K-8 district near Sacramento put a new cellphone policy in place this year to cut down on classroom distractions and behavior problems. The policy requires students to turn off cellphones, personal tablets, Bluetooth headphones or smartwatches and to store them away during school hours.

    The district’s elementary schools already had a no-phone policy, but it was not enforced uniformly across the district, Zachreson said. The district decided to put a uniform policy in place and to expand it to all grade levels.

    Even without district policies, some teachers have banned phones in their classrooms. Nicolle Fefferman, a longtime LAUSD educator and co-founder of the Facebook group Parents Supporting Teachers, is one of them. When cellphones are not tucked away, Fefferman said, it can be challenging for teachers to “police” their use. 

    “I would tell my students: ‘I see you for so little time every day that I’m really selfish. I’m really greedy,’” Fefferman said. “‘I want every minute of your attention for the work that we’re doing together in this class.’” 

    A Phineas Banning Senior High School classroom with a “phone parking lot” in Los Angeles Unified School District.
    Credit: Mallika Seshadri

    United Teachers Los Angeles, the union representing more than 35,000 educators across LAUSD, supports the board’s decision to implement a districtwide policy. 

    “For these policies to be effective, strong collaboration is essential,” Gina Gray, an LAUSD middle school English teacher, told EdSource in a statement on behalf of the union.

    “School district administrators must work closely with educators and parents to implement these changes,” Gray said. “Educators care deeply about the well-being of our students, and their families should be included in decisions about changes to our school communities.” 

    California Teachers Association President David Goldberg agrees: “Our union has supported improving school environments and restricting the use of smartphones on campuses,” he said in a statement. “As educators, we always seek to help our students reach their full potential, and we are moved by the data, listening to our students and their families, and our own experiences showing that smartphones can be a distraction and harmful to the mental health of students.”

    Bans gain national momentum

    California may soon join Florida, Indiana, Louisiana, South Carolina and Ohio in passing legislation that bans or restricts cellphone use on public school campuses.

    Although California law allows districts to restrict the use of cellphones on campus, it does not require them to. That could change if a bill working its way through the Legislature passes. Assembly Bill 3216 would require school districts to adopt a policy to limit or prohibit the use of smartphones by students. The bill passed the Senate Appropriations Committee last week and is likely to make it to the governor’s desk for final approval, according to School Services, an education consulting company. 

    Another piece of legislation, Senate Bill 1283, would allow, but not require, districts to limit students’ use of social media while on campus. The bill is expected to get a vote on the Assembly floor this month.

    The bills have bipartisan support. 

    “Josh Hoover’s a Republican who’s putting forth this legislation (Assembly Bill 3216),” Zachreson said. “Gavin Newsom is pushing school districts to take action. You have Ron DeSantis and an Arkansas governor doing the same thing. I mean, when you have Gavin Newsom and Ron DeSantis on the same page, I think you have a winning issue.”





    Source link

  • Lawsuit against West Contra Costa schools could set precedent for how districts handle complaints

    Lawsuit against West Contra Costa schools could set precedent for how districts handle complaints


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

    Photo: Andrew Reed/EdSource

    A recently filed lawsuit against the West Contra Costa Unified School District could set a new precedent for how districts in California handle and comply with complaints filed by students, educators and community members. 

    The lawsuit, filed by civil rights law firm Public Advocates last month, alleges the school district failed to remedy issues in the required time frame for nearly 50 “Williams complaints” filed by teachers, students and parents since June 2023. The bulk of the complaints were about poor building conditions at Stege Elementary School, and three were filed about teacher vacancies. There are five complainants, including four educators and a parent, who are suing the district.

    West Contra Costa is the first district in the state to be sued under the Williams v. California settlement in 2004, a landmark case that established the Williams complaint process, and the right to textbooks, safe schools and qualified teachers for all California public school students. Public Advocates attorneys led that charge 20 years ago and are now turning to the courts to uphold the standards it set and to stop the unlawful practice of filling full-time teacher positions with rolling substitutes.

    “It’s important for districts to know that this is a process that can be enforced by the courts, and they can be subject to a court order when they don’t abide by this specific process,” said Dane Shikman, attorney with Munger, Tolles, & Olson LLP, who is assisting with the lawsuit.

    Public Advocates attorney Karissa Provenza said she hopes the lawsuit sets a precedent and that other districts that aren’t complying with the Williams complaint process “fall in line.” 

    The law firm has kept a close watch on West Contra Costa for years, and Provenza has spent the last few years building relationships with educators, organizers and families. But it shouldn’t just be those districts that Public Advocates attorneys are watching that are held accountable.

    “We know there are issues across the board when it comes to districts following through with Williams complaints,” Provenza said. “We’re hoping this (lawsuit) can stand out.”

    Anyone can file a Williams complaint, and school districts have up to 30 days to fix the issue and 45 days to respond to the complaint in court. District officials responded to the 45 building condition complaints at Stege Elementary School six months later, and only after plaintiffs’ attorneys repeatedly reminded the district of its legal obligation, the lawsuit alleges. 

    “It’s a highly informal process that the districts often get away with something less than a full remedy of the complaints, or they delay on getting a response back,” Shikman said.

    According to the lawsuit, West Contra Costa’s response “acknowledged the complaints, cited a nonexistent section of the Education Code, claimed the district had no duty to respond within the statutory 45-day timeline, and promised to provide a substantive response with an update by January 12, 2024.”

    That response never came, the lawsuit says. 

    The complaints said the Richmond school had moldy walls, inoperable windows, classrooms reaching more than 90 degrees without ventilation, and broken floor tiles. Lead and asbestos were also found after the district hired an environmental firm to test building materials. 

    “One of the worst conditions for the students’ learning and teaching was probably the heat,” said Stege teacher Sam Cleare, who is one of the complainants in the lawsuit. “My first year there, we even watched crayons melt outside, but it wasn’t even that much hotter outside than it was inside.”

    A student in the after-school program at Stege Elementary School in the West Contra Costa Unified School District.
    Credit: Sam Cleare

    Building conditions at Stege Elementary were never improved, and district officials have “repeatedly” acknowledged conditions at Stege were “dangerous,” the lawsuit says. Superintendent Chris Hurst announced the school was closing for repairs on July 23, four days after the lawsuit was filed and hazardous materials were detected during the removal of window panels.

    District officials did not respond to requests for comment on this story and have previously said they don’t comment on litigation. 

    Unlawful practices

    District officials did respond to the three complaints about teacher vacancies, the lawsuit says, but the positions weren’t filled within 30 days and solutions weren’t reported.

    Hurst addressed teacher vacancies at a recent board meeting and said the district is “working hard” to fill all positions before the start of the school year this week. The district has posted on job boards and social media platforms, attended job fairs and is partnering with residency programs to recruit teachers.

    “But the district’s statutory mandate is not just to ‘try hard’ to recruit teachers; it is to actually provide every student with a permanent, qualified teacher,” the lawsuit says.

    If positions aren’t filled, the district’s plan is to fall back on substitutes, which is the reason teacher vacancy complaints were filed in the first place. The complaints said it was illegal to rely on substitutes long-term and in the district’s response, officials acknowledged its practices were unlawful. 

    Provenza said she is not surprised the district continues to rely on substitutes.

    “I wish I could start hearing that they were going to start shifting their ways, but unfortunately, it seems like relying unlawfully on substitutes is something that they’re going to continue to do,” Provenza said.

    The district has relied on day-to-day, 30-day, and 60-day substitutes to fill teacher vacancies. Teachers have also had to pick up extra classes or have had students added to their classrooms, often from different grades. This school year, the district is also asking credentialed staff who aren’t usually in the classroom to step in.

    “Substitutes did not follow curricula or assign homework as a dedicated year-long educator would have, and students in those classrooms were denied the stability and consistency that a permanent qualified teacher provides,” the lawsuit says.

    Complaints were filed at Stege Elementary, Helms Middle and Kennedy High schools, some of the district’s highest-need schools, where more than 80% of students are low-income. Substitutes were used for an entire school year in some classes, the lawsuit says.

    Some students at Kennedy High weren’t sure they would receive grades at the end of the last school year because they never had a permanent teacher, according to the lawsuit. Permanent teachers weren’t assigned to an English language development class, a reading and writing class, a P.E. class, and two music classes. 

    Most of Kennedy’s students are Hispanic or Latino and Black or African American — 73% and 18% respectively in the 2022-23 school year, the most recent year of available state data. That same school year, 84% of students did not meet grade-level math standards and nearly 58% did not meet reading standards.

    A math, science and English class at Helms Middle did not have permanent teachers the last school year, the lawsuit alleges. Nearly 70% of Helms students did not meet grade-level literacy standards and 82% did not meet math standards for the 2022-23 school year, data shows.

    Helms Middle mostly serves Hispanic and Latino students, almost 83% in the 2022-23 school year. The next largest population is Black or African American, about 7%. Almost half the students (47%) are also English learners. 

    There weren’t permanent teachers in a kindergarten, third grade, fourth grade, and second and third grade split class at Stege Elementary last year, according to the lawsuit.

    Most of the student population is Black or African American, nearly 39% in the 2022-23 school year, and Hispanic or Latino, 34%. About 73% of students did not meet grade-level standards in math and 75% did not meet literacy standards. 

    The lawsuit calls the teacher vacancy problems in the district a “crisis.” 

    West Contra Costa “faces more teacher vacancies than its neighboring districts and continuously under performs in retaining fully prepared and properly assigned teachers,” the lawsuit says. “Quality teachers are the leading school-related factor contributing to a student’s success.” 

    Students have complained to the board during public comment about teacher vacancies this past school year, saying they aren’t motivated to attend class with consistently different teachers. One high school student said they weren’t learning any new materials in math class. 

    According to the lawsuit, the district hasn’t reported any solutions to fill teacher positions and blamed the vacancies on the statewide teacher shortage. The lawsuit gave various solutions, including assigning certified teachers of other subjects to vacant classes, using emergency teaching permits, and hiring university interns and retired teachers.

    Last year, West Contra Costa did tap into retirees to help fill vacancies, but it’s unclear how many and if these efforts are continuing. The district has said it can’t hire retired teachers for a full school year, the lawsuit alleges, but attorneys claim that under SB 765, districts can do so.

    Problems filling teacher vacancies are also connected to poor working environments, Provenza said. It’s difficult to attract and retain teachers when they don’t feel supported, are overworked, and lose prep periods to cover other classes.

    ‘This year made staying very challenging’

    Educators, parents and community members have fought for better conditions at Stege Elementary for years, and for teacher Sam Cleare, her advocacy efforts began with the 45 Williams complaints. 

    She called the conditions at Stege “inhumane” and “unbearable” and said there was nowhere to escape the heat. 

    “Students felt sick,” Cleare said. “I felt lightheaded. Not only was it difficult or impossible to learn, but it felt unsafe as well.”

    Sam Cleare, a third-grade teacher, has taken a job with the teachers union.
    Credit: Andrew Reed / EdSource

    Cleare remembers the windows starting to fall apart when trying to open them and said once she cut her finger on the edge of a window. She taught at Stege for the last seven years, and said it was her dream to retire there. But she’s decided to take a job with the teachers union. 

    “I will miss working at Stege terribly, but this year made staying very challenging,” Cleare said. “Many teachers struggle to stay at the school due to the working conditions.”

    On top of teacher vacancies, Stege has battled dwindling enrollment, chronic absenteeism and a long-awaited renovation for nearly a decade. The building was slated to be remodeled by the 2020-21 school year, but there have been delays. Last November, the board approved an increased budget for renovations, from $2.9 million to $43 million, because of the severe need for repairs.

    Parents and community members have been frustrated by the delays and lack of funding going toward repairs. The concerns resurfaced at a Stege community meeting last week when parents were calling out district officials for not addressing the health hazards and safety concerns sooner. 

    District officials shared an annual report on Stege with the community, the Facility Inspection Tool, a visual inspection that determines if a school needs repairs. According to the report, Stege received a “good” rating, which means “the school is maintained in good repair with a number of non-critical deficiencies noted. These deficiencies are isolated, and/or resulting from minor wear and tear, and/or in the process of being mitigated.”

    Meeting attendees were outraged by the conclusion of the inspection, which was done last August, and said it was offensive. Parents and educators told stories about sewage coming out of the toilets when flushing, drywall issues, and complained that students were subject to unhealthy conditions.

    With the temporary closure of Stege Elementary, students and staff are starting the 2024-25 school year at Dejon Middle School. 





    Source link

  • No cuts for schools, more funding for early literacy, in Newsom’s revised budget

    No cuts for schools, more funding for early literacy, in Newsom’s revised budget


    Gov. Gavin Newsom presents his revised 2025-26 state budget during a news conference in Sacramento on May 14, 2025.

    Credit: AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli

    TK-12 schools and community colleges can expect the same funding in 2025-26 that they received this year, plus a small cost-of-living adjustment, and there will be a big boost for early literacy, Gov. Gavin Newsom revealed Wednesday in the revision to his January state budget plan.

    Schools and community colleges will be shielded from the pain facing other state services because of the revised forecast of a $12 billion drop in state revenues that Newsom blamed on the “Trump slump” — the president’s erratic tariff and other economic policies that are affecting California.

    For the University of California and California State University, the news was better than anticipated. The systems would face a 3% cut for 2025-26, notably less than the nearly 8% reduction Newsom proposed in January. The smaller cut may provide some relief at a time when higher education in California and across the nation is worried about losses in federal research grants and other funding under Trump administration policies. 

    The 2.3% cost-of-living adjustment in 2025-26 for most TK-12 programs is determined by a federal formula that does not factor in the cost of housing, the biggest expense facing teachers and other employees.

    In his May budget revision, Newsom keeps significant money for TK-12 programs that he proposed in January for fully rolling out transitional kindergarten for 4-year-olds, along with additional funding to reduce class sizes, and for expanding summer school and after-school learning to more districts.

    And Newsom would add $200 million to his earlier $543 million proposal for early literacy instruction, with money to buy instructional materials, hire literacy coaches and train teachers in “evidence-based literacy instruction,” which is code for teaching phonics and word decoding as well as other fundamental reading skills.

    That funding would take a significant step toward creating and funding a comprehensive early literacy strategy and coincides with compromise legislation, pushed by Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, on spelling out what the instruction and reading materials should look like.

    “We’re thrilled. We’re excited,” said Marshall Tuck, CEO of EdVoice, which pushed early literacy legislation. “In a really tight budget year, prioritizing reading for California kids and investing $200 million is real leadership.”

    Newsom would also add to past efforts to recruit teachers by including $64.2 million in one-time funding for the Golden State Teacher Grant Program, under which teachers receive college tuition in exchange for agreeing to teach in underserved districts and in subjects facing critical shortages, and $100 million to pay stipends to student teachers. Unpaid student teaching has been cited as one of the primary reasons teacher candidates fail to complete their credentials. 

    The Legislature has a month to reshape Newsom’s budget before the June 15 constitutional deadline to pass a budget for the fiscal year that starts on July 1.

    What the budget doesn’t include, however, is any funding to backfill for the potential loss of billions of federal dollars in Medi-Cal funding for school physical and mental health services, cuts for Head Start programs, training grants for new teachers and research grants for the University of California and California State University, and the dismantling of the AmeriCorps program, which supplies teachers aides and tutors in hundreds of low-income schools.

    “Our ability to backfill all these federal cuts — no, we’re not going to be in a position to do that, we just are not in that position,” Newsom said. “It’s the old adage, you can’t do everything but you can do anything. There may be areas where we can make adjustments.”

    “I think we should be cautious about eliminating consideration of x, y, and z until we see the totality of the challenges as they present themselves.”

    In one cost-cutting measure, Gov. Newsom is proposing to roll back California’s health insurance program for undocumented immigrant adults, by charging premiums and freezing new enrollment, a move that advocates said will affect their children, many of whom are U.S. citizens. One in 10 California children are estimated to have an undocumented parent.

    “When a parent or family member is sick and unable to work or provide care, kids suffer as a result,” said Mayra Alvarez, president of the nonprofit organization The Children’s Partnership.  “Ripping away these family members’ access to health care, while they are also under threat of cruel immigration enforcement and other anti-immigrant policies, in turn puts the well-being of our children at risk.”

    Higher education

    State funding for the state’s system of 116 community colleges would change little from last year, receiving 0.6% less, at $8.9 billion. However, some of its important funding — $531.6 million from Proposition 98 revenues — would be deferred for a year under the proposal.  

    UC would have its funding cut by $129.7 million, while CSU would lose $143.8 million. In January, Newsom’s administration had proposed deeper cuts of $396.6 million and $375.2 million, respectively. 

    The revised budget maintains a proposal to defer previously promised 5% budget increases until 2027-28 for both systems. Those deferrals, which were part of Newsom’s multiyear compact agreements with the systems, were also included in Newsom’s January budget proposal. 

    The compacts, originally agreed to in 2022, promised annual budget increases for UC and CSU in exchange for the systems working toward goals such as increasing graduation rates and enrolling more California residents. 

    “We were able to hold strong to that over a two-year period. And we’re struggling now with some challenges,” Newsom said during a news conference Wednesday, though he added that the compacts are “sacrosanct” and that the systems would get their deferred dollars in 2027-28.

    By reducing the proposed cut to UC’s budget for 2025-26, the 10-campus system will be able to minimize cuts to student support services and preserve “critical investments like affordable student housing construction,” President Michael V. Drake said Wednesday in a statement.

    CSU Chancellor Mildred García in January warned that a nearly 8% state budget reduction would result in larger class sizes and fewer course offerings for the system’s more than 460,000 students, hampering their prospects for graduating on time. With those cuts now dialed back to 3%, García praised the May revision as a “thoughtful and measured approach to addressing the state’s fiscal challenges.”

    Proposition 98 maneuvers

    In total, the May revision proposes $45.7 billion for the state’s higher education institutions and the California Student Aid Commission.

    The minimum funding for 2025-26 for Proposition 98, the formula that determines the portion of the general fund that must go to TK-12 and community colleges, would be $114.6 billion, down from $118.9 billion in 2024-25 because of shrinking state revenues.

    Newsom proposes to make up the difference by shifting numbers around, depleting what was left in the Proposition 98 rainy day fund. Among other maneuvers, he would:

    • Drain the remaining $540 million from a fund that was $8.4 billion only two years ago, when the state faced a fiscal crisis.
    • Defer $1.8 billion that would be due to schools in June 2026 by a month, to July 2026. Schools should notice little difference, although the maneuver does create a state obligation that must be repaid.
    • Withhold $1.3 billion due to schools and community colleges in 2024-25 in anticipation that the revenues for the rest of the year might come up short because of the further decline in state revenues.

    This last maneuver grabbed the attention of the California School Boards Association, which filed a lawsuit over a similar effort last year and is threatening to do so again.

    “Even in lean times, investing in public schools is California’s best economic strategy, so we cannot sidestep constitutional protections for public education nor underfund Prop 98 to offset shortfalls in other sections of the budget,” association President Bettye Lusk said in a statement.

    The immediate reaction to the budget proposal was positive, with some caveats.

    “The bottom line is that amid a budget crisis, the governor is protecting every major investment in education,” said Kevin Gordon, president of Capitol Advisors, a consultant for school districts. “We want to make sure Prop 98 funding is accounted for. As long as that’s the case, there’s not much to complain about.”

    Scott Moore, head of Kidango, a nonprofit that runs many Bay Area child care centers, praised the commitment to universal transitional kindergarten (TK) while criticizing Newsom’s decision to suspend a cost-of-living adjustment for child care providers for low-income children and freeze funding for emergency child care services for foster and homeless children. 

    “We know that small class sizes and highly qualified teachers are two of the most important quality standards to ensure children benefit from pre-K. This budget invests wisely in TK,” he said. “The proposed cut to the COLA (cost of living increase) for child care providers must be restored. Now is the worst time to eliminate a small, but very much needed and deserved COLA for those who take care of our youngest and most vulnerable children.”





    Source link

  • LAUSD’s 100 priority schools show support for equity, but some say program isn’t enough

    LAUSD’s 100 priority schools show support for equity, but some say program isn’t enough


    Students catch up and get ahead during LAUSD’s Summer of Learning.

    Credit: Mallika Seshadri / EdSource

    Thomas Jefferson High School has a rich history. 

    It is one of the oldest schools in the Los Angeles Unified School District — established more than a century ago — and lies in Central Avenue, which used to be called “Little Harlem” during the 1920s and 1930s. 

    Its graduates — from Ralph Bunche, the first Black Nobel laureate, to Alvin Ailey, the legendary choreographer — have had lasting impact.

    Now, Jefferson High sits on LAUSD’s list of 100 priority schools — meaning that Superintendent Alberto Carvalho has identified it as one of the district’s highest-needs campuses with lagging academic performance and lower attendance rates. 

    In an effort to promote equity across the district, LAUSD provides priority schools like Jefferson extra support and is the first to receive various resources, including instructional days designed to recover pandemic learning losses, as well as being the first to pilot LAUSD’s AI personal assistant

    “This approach places schools with the most need in a place of priority in the District regarding time and attention by Central and Region Offices,” an LAUSD spokesperson said in a statement to EdSource. 

    While veteran teachers and community activists have applauded Carvalho for putting an emphasis on equity, they have also said that being placed on the list creates a stigma that affects the schools’ administrators, teachers and students. Many have also warned that the superintendent’s approach is too standardized and does not address the root, societal causes of students’ academic struggles. 

    “Nobody wants to be listed as a failing school,” said Nicolle Fefferman, a longtime LAUSD educator who co-founded the Facebook group Parents Supporting Teachers. “Who wants to be on this list? No one — because it feels like an indictment of the hard work that we are doing every day at these schools in the face of huge historical and institutional obstacles.” 

    According to a district spokesperson, LAUSD’s priority schools have higher percentages of underserved students, including those who are Black, Latino, foster youth, unhoused and from immigrant backgrounds. 

    Proponents of other equity programs that largely support the same student body, including the Student Equity Needs Index, say their efforts have been sidelined and that they have not received the same level of support. 

    LAUSD has a history of prioritizing equity, Fefferman said, and Carvalho wasn’t the first district leader to roll out a list of struggling schools during Fefferman’s tenure as a teacher in the district. Former Superintendent Ruben Zacarias, who served in the late 1990s, did something similar. 

    “Los Angeles Unified is committed to an equitable approach in providing historically underserved schools with critical access to supports and resources,” the spokesperson for LAUSD said. 

    A need for equity support

    Largely clustered in south and southeast Los Angeles, the roughly 54,000 LAUSD students who attend Carvalho’s priority schools have struggled with chronic absenteeism — 38.2% in the 2022-23 academic year — and lower academic performance. Only 23% of students attending priority schools met or exceeded English standards, while 16% met or exceeded math standards, according to Smarter Balanced Test results for that same year. 

    Meanwhile, nearly 70% of priority school graduates failed to complete their A-G requirements, which are mandatory for admission to the University of California or the California State University systems. 

    Data for the 2023-24 academic year is not yet available, and it is difficult to determine whether performance at priority schools has improved since they were so identified. 

    So far, the priority schools have improved their outcomes, the spokesperson said, noting that their rate of improvement is larger than the district’s overall. 

    “The questions are: How did those schools get there? How long have they been there? And what’s the plan?” asked Evelyn Aleman, the organizer of the Facebook group Our Voice/Nuestra Voz. 

    “Outside of tutoring and additional school days, things like that, what does (being a priority school) mean? Is it going to be Saturday classes throughout the year? Is it just going to be three additional days? That’s simply not going to be enough.” 

    According to a district spokesperson, developing the list of 100 priority schools was part of a larger plan to improve student performance — and that the campuses on the list receive strategic and priority staffing, along with additional professional development opportunities that are “specific to their school’s unique needs.” 

    They also receive more instructional coaches and dual/current enrollment options. Their progress is more closely monitored. 

    Some LAUSD teachers, however, maintain that the extra support that comes with being a priority school won’t be enough because there are other institutional and societal factors that get in the way of better outcomes. 

    “There is so much stress in the community — much of it because of poverty, some because of violence. And it’s not that there’s violence all the time, but it’s the fact that there can be at any moment — that you’re on guard,” said Susan Ferguson, a veteran LAUSD educator who previously taught at Jefferson High School. 

    “When you’re on your stressors like that for an extended period of time, it affects your immune system. It affects your ability to learn and focus. It affects so many things,” Ferguson said.

    ‘I just don’t feel like we’re moving forward’ 

    Educators in priority schools say they can feel pressure from the district to improve outcomes, and Ferguson said LAUSD officials would come by and visit classrooms on a weekly basis. 

    “Classrooms are constantly having visitors: ‘Are they teaching? What are they teaching?’ The people coming in, I feel like, are well-intentioned, but they’re visiting 10 different schools who have different needs,” Ferguson said.

    “And yet, they’re being asked to help all of us, and they can’t — not unless they really spend time at one school looking at it.” 

    Administrators at the Jefferson High School campus, Ferguson said, have been under enormous pressure to improve academic outcomes. 

    She also said she wouldn’t be surprised if students’ psychology were impacted by the constant flow of district administrators in and out of classrooms — and any nervousness coming from their teachers. 

    “Our kids aren’t stupid. I’m sure that they have picked up on … some sort of problem,” Ferguson said. “I’m really hoping that they’re not taking it as being them. … I can’t imagine them not feeling the anxiety.”

    More than anything, Ferguson maintains that the district’s standardized approach may not address the root cause of students’ academic challenges. 

    “‘Let’s have tutors. Let’s assign these tutors to Jefferson and make the kids stay till 6 p.m.’” Ferguson said. “Well, if you bothered to come to our school and talk to our kids, you’d realize that we don’t have kids that generally stay until 6 p.m. because it’s not even safe. And people have family members to take care of and responsibilities.” 

    “It just totally seems not in touch with what’s going on and what the issues are.”

    ‘A broader view’: SENI’s approach to equity 

    A long-term equity program across LAUSD schools — the Student Equity Needs Index (SENI) — is celebrating its 10th anniversary this year. 

    The effort, which was developed by the district alongside various community partners, ranks and categorizes all of LAUSD’s campuses based on their needs. The 15 factors that inform SENI’s rankings go beyond academic factors to include the prevalence of gun violence and asthma rates. 

    During the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, exposure to the coronavirus and related deaths were also taken into account. 

    Jessenia Reyes, Catalyst California’s director of educational equity, said social indicators help them focus on challenges more uniquely faced by lower income communities and communities of color. 

    SENI then uses a sliding scale to allocate funding, which schools can use to address whatever needs they and their communities collectively feel are most pressing, said Daniela Hernández, the senior director of campaign development at Innercity Struggle, a local nonprofit organization that has been part of the effort to implement the program. 

    About 90% of SENI funds — which come from the district and are given to schools based on their level of need — went toward bolstering staff across elementary, middle and high schools, with many choosing to focus on psychiatric social workers and pupil services and attendance staff, according to a 2021 evaluation of the district’s SENI program conducted by American Institutes for Research. 

    The same evaluation found that SENI helped boost English language arts scores among economically disadvantaged students and those who are English learners. Math scores also increased among students with disabilities who are also English learners and economically disadvantaged.  

    Despite the improvements SENI has seen over the past decade, community advocates have also sounded alarms that not all of SENI funds allocated to schools are spent by principals. According to a district budget report, there is roughly $282 million that remains unused going into the 2024-25 academic year. 

    “Schools are encouraged to utilize SENI funds for each school year in order to serve the students who generated those dollars, and to engage with educational partners regarding the use of these funds,” a district spokesperson said in a statement to EdSource. 

    “Unspent SENI dollars are reallocated to schools based on need in order to address learning acceleration, provide mental health services and supports, provide additional learning supports, support student attendance, and address the needs of student populations.”

    Priority schools, the spokesperson said, get to keep up to 70% of their carryover funds. 

    A delicate relationship 

    This past year, 88 high- and highest-need SENI schools were listed on Carvalho’s list of 100 priority schools. A district spokesperson said that SENI serves as more of a financial designation, while the 100 priority schools list is more of a “strategic designation for central and regional support systems.”

    Advocates have said they appreciate LAUSD’s expressed commitment to equity. 

    “The district, if anything, has been ahead of the game of understanding that students don’t learn in a box — that whatever happens in their community matters,” said Miguel Dominguez, the director of development at Community Coalition, who has worked with LAUSD on the SENI initiative. 

    “If they’re being exposed to gun fatalities in their neighborhood, maybe doing a test or a pop quiz might not be something at the forefront of their mind. … This understanding of this overall whole child approach has been big.” 

    But several advocates also maintain that the district’s attitude toward SENI has changed with the emergence of the 100 priority schools. 

    When Carvalho announced he had developed developedhe list, Reyes said SENI seemed to drift onto the back burner; and, they felt an increasing pressure to prove SENI’s worth, and that it “wasn’t just symbolic” but had funding tied to it. 

    She noted that funding for SENI has increased over the years — soaring from $25 to $700 million. Advocates have continued to press for sustained support. 

    “Now more than ever, it is vital that LA Unified takes actionable steps to demonstrate its core belief of equity by interrupting the course of history and committing to prioritizing stable, long-term adequate funding to meet the unique needs of highest-needs students,” a March letter from various SENI supporters to Carvalho and the school board states. 

    “This includes protection of SENI and ensuring the $700 million investment is a permanent and stable funding source beyond the 2024-2025 school year.”      

    Meanwhile, SENI advocates said that a lack of transparency from the district and its failure to immediately release the list of 100 priority schools has made it harder for them to work collaboratively. 

    The district, however, noted that support for priority schools is intended to help campuses take advantage of their resources, including SENI funding and “removing any barriers that may interfere” with their schools’ individual efforts. 

    “There’s room for improvement in collaborating and working in parallel. Because ultimately, if they are SENI schools and they are priority schools, that means it’s a high-need school, period,” Reyes said. “It needs the support and the love from everybody and everything.”





    Source link

  • Bill to address antisemitism in schools to get special hearing Wednesday

    Bill to address antisemitism in schools to get special hearing Wednesday


    Students at a middle school in Los Angeles walk to class. ROBYN BECK / AFP)

    Credit Robin Beck / AFP

    Members of the Legislative Jewish Caucus have switched strategies to address their alarm over rising incidents of antisemitism in schools.

    They have abandoned a bill that called for creating academic standards that would have spelled out what should and should not be taught in American ethnic studies courses.

    Instead, with leaders of three other legislative ethnic caucuses also expressing support, they have introduced a bill to strengthen and broaden existing anti-discrimination protections based on race and ethnicity to include new wording to apply to national identity and religion.

    The Assembly Education Committee will hold a special hearing on Assembly Bill 715, introduced by Assemblymembers Rick Zbur, D-San Francisco, and Dawn Addis, D-Morro Bay, on Wednesday afternoon at 1:30. That is the final day for moving forward any bill for possible passage this year.

    “AB 715 demonstrates solidarity among California Legislative Diversity Caucuses to resolutely stand with the Jewish community to adopt meaningful legislation to root out hate in our classrooms,” Zbur said in a statement.

    The bill would add teeth to the uniform complaint process in schools and create a state-level antisemitism coordinator to oversee compliance with anti-discrimination laws.

    It also would apply anti-discrimination protections to content taught in class and to the contractors who write the courses’ lesson plans and train teachers. Although the bill does not mention ethnic studies, it presumably would apply to groups affiliated with the Liberated Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum Consortium, which compares Israel’s repression of Palestinians with European colonialists’ subjugation of people of color in Africa and Asia, and white American settlers’ mistreatment of Native Americans. Many of the complaints and lawsuits charging antisemitism have been against schools and districts that use the Liberated Ethnic Studies course content.

    Zbur said that school districts have ignored or delayed responding to complaints by Jewish families of bias and a hostile school environment. “Families should not have to file lawsuits,” he said.

    The key sections lay out broad intentions; the exact language is still being negotiated, Zbur said, and will be added as amendments to the bill in the coming weeks.

    The Jewish Caucus’ prior bill, to replace the current ethnic studies voluntary framework with academic standards, would have faced years of contention and low odds of passage. It was opposed by the California Teachers Association and ethnic studies faculty at California State University and the University of California, who have created alternatives to the state-approved framework. The bill would have applied only to high school ethnic studies, not all courses and grades. 

    The chairs of the Legislative Black Caucus, the Legislative Latino Caucus and the Asian American and Pacific Islander Caucus signed a statement endorsing AB 715. However, many groups that oppose the ethnic studies standards bill are gearing up to fight AB 715.

    “Repackaging censorship under the guise of combating antisemitism does a disservice to the very real fight against hate. We already have laws protecting students from discrimination. AB 715 would effectively silence educators and erase Palestinian voices,” Hussam Ayloush, CEO of the California chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, wrote in a statement.

    In 2021, the Legislature passed legislation requiring that all high schools offer a semester-long course in ethnic studies, starting in fall 2025, and for all students to take it for a high school diploma, beginning in 2029-30. But the law requires state funding to take effect, and Gov. Gavin Newsom has not proposed any funding, and indicated he would not do so in the 2025-26 state budget. Since AB 715 also would create a state mandate, it’s unclear whether Newsom would sign it.





    Source link

  • With AI in schools, local leadership matters more than ever

    With AI in schools, local leadership matters more than ever


    Credit: Julie Leopo/EdSource

    Last week, the Trump administration’s draft executive order to integrate artificial intelligence (AI) into K-12 schools made national headlines. The order, still in flux, would direct federal agencies to embed AI in classrooms and partner with private companies to create new educational programs. The move comes as China, Singapore and other nations ramp up their AI education initiatives, fueling talk of a new “AI space race.” But as the world’s biggest players push for rapid adoption, the real question for American education isn’t whether AI is coming — it’s who will shape its role in our schools, and on whose terms.

    AI is not simply the next classroom gadget or software subscription. It represents a fundamentally new kind of disruptor in the education space — one that doesn’t just supplement public education but is increasingly building parallel systems alongside it. These AI-powered platforms, often funded by public dollars through vouchers or direct-to-consumer models, can operate outside the traditional oversight and values of public schools. The stakes are high: AI is already influencing what counts as education, who delivers it and how it is governed.

    This transformation is happening fast. For example, in the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) the district’s ambitious “AI friend” chatbot project, meant to support students and families, collapsed when its startup partner folded, exposing the risks of investing public funds in untested AI ventures. Meanwhile, major tech firms are pitching AI as a “tutor for every learner and a TA for every teacher,” promising to personalize learning and free up educators’ time. The reality is more complex: AI’s promise is real, but so are its pitfalls, especially when it bypasses local voices and democratic control.

    The rise of AI in education is reshaping three core principles: agency, accountability and equity.

    • Agency: Traditionally, public education has empowered teachers, students and communities to shape learning. Now, AI platforms — sometimes chosen by parents or delivered through private providers — can shift decision-making from classrooms to opaque algorithms. Teachers may find themselves implementing AI-generated lessons, while students’ learning paths are increasingly set by proprietary systems. If local educators and families aren’t at the table, agency risks becoming fragmented and individualized, eroding the collective mission of public schooling.
    • Accountability: In public schools, accountability means clear lines of responsibility and public oversight. But when AI tools misclassify students or private micro-schools underperform, it’s unclear who is answerable: the vendor, the parent, the state, or the algorithm? This diffusion of responsibility can undermine public trust and make it harder to ensure quality and fairness.
    • Equity: AI has the potential to personalize learning and expand access, but its benefits often flow unevenly. Wealthier families and districts are more likely to access cutting-edge tools, while under-resourced students risk being left behind. As AI-powered platforms grow outside of traditional systems, the risk is that public funds flow to private, less accountable alternatives, deepening educational divides.

    It’s tempting to see AI as an unstoppable force, destined to either save or doom public education. But that narrative misses the most important variable: us. AI is not inherently good or bad. Its impact will depend on how — and by whom — it is implemented.

    The U.S. education system’s greatest strength is its tradition of local control and community engagement. As national and global pressures mount, local leaders — school boards, district administrators, teachers, and parents — must drive how AI is used. That means:

    • Demanding transparency from vendors about how AI systems work and how data is used.
    • Prioritizing investments in teacher training and professional development, so educators can use AI as a tool for empowerment, not replacement.
    • Insisting that AI tools align with local values and needs, rather than accepting one-size-fits-all solutions from distant tech companies or federal mandates.
    • Building coalitions across districts and states to share expertise and advocate for policies that center agency, accountability, and equity.

    As Dallas schools Superintendent Stephanie Elizalde put it, “It’s irresponsible to not teach (AI). We have to. We are preparing kids for their future”. But preparing students for the future doesn’t mean ceding control to algorithms or outside interests. It means harnessing AI’s potential while holding fast to the public values that define American education.

    The choices we make now — especially at the local level — will determine whether AI becomes a tool for equity and empowerment, or a force for further privatization and exclusion. Policymakers should focus less on top-down mandates and more on empowering local communities to lead. AI can strengthen public education, but only if we ensure that the people closest to students — teachers, families and local leaders — have the authority and resources to shape its use.

    The world is changing fast. Let’s make sure our schools change on our terms.

    •••

    Patricia Burch is a professor at the USC Rossier School of Education and author of “Hidden Markets: The New Educational Privatization” (2009, 2020).

    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

  • What will it take to implement the English Learner Roadmap in all California schools?

    What will it take to implement the English Learner Roadmap in all California schools?


    Children complete a grammar worksheet in Spanish at a dual-language immersion program in a Glendale elementary school.

    Credit: Lillian Mongeau/EdSource

    California published a guide for how districts should serve English learners seven years ago. It’s called the English Learner Roadmap Policy, and it’s largely seen as groundbreaking.

    But many districts still haven’t used that road map to change their practices, advocates say.

    “It’s not systemic across the state,” said Shelly Spiegel-Coleman, strategic adviser to Californians Together, a coalition of organizations that advocates for English learners. “You can go to school districts and ask teachers, ‘Have you ever heard of the road map?’ And they look at you like you’re from Mars. They’ve never heard of it.”

    Lawmakers are now pushing to fully implement the road map, by passing Assembly Bill 2074, introduced by Assemblymembers Al Muratsuchi, D-Torrance, and David Alvarez, D-Chula Vista. If signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, the bill will require the California Department of Education to create a state implementation plan for the English Learner Roadmap with goals and a system to monitor whether those goals are met. 

    The department will have to first convene an advisory committee, made up of district and county offices of education, teachers, parents of English learners and nonprofit organizations with experience implementing the English Learner Roadmap Policy. The department will have to submit the final implementation plan to the Legislature by Nov. 1, 2026, and begin reporting on which districts, county offices of education and charter schools are implementing the plan by Jan. 1, 2027.

    A lack of funding changed the scope of the bill. An earlier version would have also created three positions in the state Department of Education to develop, plan and then support districts to implement the English Learner Roadmap Policy. However, those positions were cut from the bill by the Senate Appropriations Committee due to costs. A separate bill that would have created a grant program to implement the road map, Assembly Bill 2071, failed to pass the Senate Appropriations Committee, because there was no money allocated in the budget.

    You can go to school districts and ask teachers, ‘Have you ever heard of the road map?’ And they look at you like you’re from Mars. They’ve never heard of it.

    Shelly Spiegel-Coleman, strategic adviser, Californians Together

    The California English Learner Roadmap Policy was first approved by the California State Board of Education in 2017 as a guide for school districts, county offices of education and charter schools to better support English learners. 

    For many, the road map represented a pivotal change in the state’s approach to teaching English learners. It was adopted just months after voters passed Proposition 58 in 2016, which eliminated restrictions on bilingual education put in place by Proposition 227 in 1998. In stark contrast to the English-only policies in place under Proposition 227, the road map emphasizes the importance of bilingual education and bilingualism and of recognizing the assets of students who speak other languages, in addition to emphasizing teaching that “fosters high levels of English proficiency.”

    Anya Hurwitz, executive director of SEAL, a nonprofit organization that trains teachers and district leaders and promotes bilingual education, called the English Learner Roadmap a “comprehensive, visionary, research-based policy.”

    “It’s aspirational. It’s very much written for a future state, when California can center the student population that is so much at the core of who we are as a state and yet has this history of being treated as an afterthought or a box at the end of a curriculum,” said Hurwitz. “And nonetheless the state needs an implementation plan. Things don’t get done unless we have methodical plans.”

    The Legislature has twice created grant programs for districts to get help implementing the English Learner Roadmap Policy. In 2020, the California Department of Education (CDE) awarded $10 million to two grantees, Californians Together and the California Association for Bilingual Education, each of which worked with other organizations, county offices of education and school districts. In 2023, the department awarded another $10 million to four county offices of education, in Sacramento, Los Angeles, San Bernardino and Orange counties.

    These programs, however, were optional, and not all districts participated in the training or assistance.

    “We feel it’s really necessary for CDE to be very vocal and in the center of stating how important the English Learner Roadmap is, and how important it is to implement,” said Martha Hernandez, executive director of Californians Together. “When CDE says the road map is a priority, it begins to filter down to the districts. But we’re not really hearing that it’s that important from CDE.”

    Graciela García-Torres, director of multilingual education for the Sacramento County Office of Education, said the English Learner Roadmap brings her hope, as a former English learner herself and as a parent.

    “As a parent, I also see that it supports me in my endeavor to have children that grow up bilingually, knowing their culture and language is just as beautiful and important as English,” García-Torres said.

    García-Torres said the Sacramento County Office of Education has worked hard to help districts implement the road map, but a state implementation plan and more funding are needed.

    “I’m afraid that without another grant or an implementation plan, it may go back to being pretty words on the page,” García-Torres said. 

    Debra Duardo, Los Angeles County superintendent of schools, said the English Learner Roadmap has made a big difference in some districts.

    “Some of the things I’ve seen changing is the philosophy around English language learners and really moving from this deficit mentality, of ‘these are children who can’t speak English,’ to really celebrating the fact that they’re speaking multiple languages,” said Duardo.

    She said having clear goals and requiring districts to report how they’re implementing the plan will be crucial, so that the state can see where districts are struggling and how CDE can help them.

    “There are always going to people who feel like this is one more thing that you’re placing on us and it doesn’t come with funding attached to it,” said Duardo. “Districts are struggling. They don’t have their extra pandemic dollars, they didn’t have a very big COLA, and just finding the resources to implement anything can be a challenge.”

    Megan Hopkins, professor and chair of UC San Diego’s department of education studies, said many states struggle with implementation of guidance around English learners. She said a statewide plan for implementing the road map is needed, in part because many teachers and administrators don’t think English learner education applies to them.

    “English learners are often sort of viewed as separate from, or an add-on, to core instructional programs. I think what happens is people are like, ‘Oh, that’s nice, but it’s not related to what I do over here in math education,’ when in fact it is,” said Hopkins.

    Aleyda Barrera-Cruz, executive director for multilingual learner services at the San Mateo-Foster City School District, south of San Francisco, said she has attended professional development sessions on the English Learner Roadmap Policy with EL RISE!, the coalition led by Californians Together, and read through every guidance document they’ve written about the road map.

    “Where it gets tricky is sometimes things are written in a way that are not very implementation friendly. They’re written in a very theoretical way like, ‘These are the recommendations,’ so we as districts have to decide what that would look like in our district. There’s a lot of room for interpretation,” Barrera-Cruz said.

    She said principals and teachers sometimes interpret the guidelines in different ways at different schools. She would like to see CDE make it very clear how to do things like teaching English language development (teaching English to children who do not know the language), including examples of lesson plans and videos of best practices in the classroom.

    “I’m working with a very diverse group of educators. Some have learned this in their teaching credential program; some have not,” Barrera-Cruz said.

    Elodia Ortega-Lampkin, superintendent of Woodland Joint Unified School District, near Sacramento, said superintendents and school board members need training to understand why the English Learner Roadmap is needed.

    “People watch what you value and the message you send,” Ortega-Lampkin said. “It’s very hard for a principal to do this on their own without the district support. It’s got to come down from the top, including the board.”

    She said Woodland Joint Unified required all administrators and teachers to attend training about the English Learner Roadmap. They also have to use the road map when writing their mandatory annual school plans for student achievement.

    “It was not an option. It was an expectation. If we have English learners in Woodland and we’re serious about helping them succeed, we need to use a framework that is research-based and provides support for districts. Instead of piecemealing, it’s all in one to help guide those conversations in our schools,” Ortega-Lampkin said.

    Before training with the English Learner Roadmap, Ortega-Lampkin said not everyone understood how to teach English language development, often referred to as ELD. 

     “It was hard to get everyone to buy in and teach ELD. We don’t have that anymore. It’s not a discussion. People just know that ELD needs to happen. I think it’s helped change the mindset and build a better understanding,” Ortega-Lampkin said.





    Source link

  • NEA: Trump Slashes Education Budget, Encourages Privatization of Public Schools

    NEA: Trump Slashes Education Budget, Encourages Privatization of Public Schools


    The National Education Association analyzed Trump ‘s proposed budget and finds that it contains deep cuts and massive support for privatization by promoting vouchers and charter schools. The proposal mirrors Project 2025 by turning Titl 1 for low-income students and IDEA funding into block grants that can be converted to vouchers. The overall goal is to undermine public schools and cut funding.

    FY2026 Budget Request Slashes Education Funding, Shortchanges Students

    …………………………………………………………………….……….

    President Trump’s FY2026 “skinny” budget request to Congress, released on May 2, cuts non-defense domestic spending by 22.6%.  The Department of Education sustains a $12 billion reduction, a cut of approximately 15.3%. 

    ! Since the President’s budget does not list specific funding requests for every federal program, the 46-page document is a “skinny” budget. Congress ultimately has the power of the purse, but the proposal is a clear signal of the White House’s priorities: a massive 24 percent cut to U.S. domestic spending, and, privitazing our nation’s public education system.  

     

     The narrative says the budget “maintains full funding for Title I,” but the numbers tell a different story. Title I and 18 unidentified programs are combined to create a single block grant, dubbed the “K-12 Simplified Funding Program,” then that block fund is cut by $4.535 billion cut.

     

     All seven Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) programs are combined to create a single block grant called the “Special Education Simplified Funding Program.” The approach perpetuates the current shortfall—the federal government now covers 13% of special education costs, far short of the 40% Congress promised when the law was passed. 

     

     Programs slated for elimination include English Language Acquisition (Title III) and the Teacher Quality Partnership, which addresses the teacher shortage through deep clinical practice. 

     

     The budget shifts costs to states and institutions of higher education to reduce the federal investment in today’s students—our nation’s future leaders and workforce—as much as possible.  

     

     Regrouping specific, separate programs into block grants, in theory gives states more flexibility on how the money is spent. In reality, block grants usually lead to less funding and less accountability for our most vulnerable students. As the strings attached to the funding are cut, many states could maneuver block grant funds over to private school voucher programs. 

     

     Amidst these cuts, the proposal calls for investing $500 million, an increase of $60 million, to expand the number of charter schools across the country. Charter schools, along with private school vouchers, drain scarce resources for traditional public schools. 

     

    May 2025



    Source link